The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream
-
https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/article/red-hat-resets-centos-linux-and-users-are-angry/
CentOS claims it's the more stable over RHEL.
-
@scottalanmiller said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/article/red-hat-resets-centos-linux-and-users-are-angry/
CentOS claims it's the more stable over RHEL.
I couldn't find that claim anywhere in the article.
But they said "It provides a platform for rapid innovation at the community level but with a stable enough base to understand production dynamics."
To me that means that CentOS will be something like the stable version of Fedora or the RHEL beta. Who cares really. Redhat can do whatever they think makes the most sense financially - in the long or short term.
-
@scottalanmiller said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@JaredBusch said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@coliver said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
It's built from RHEL sources but it's not a clone
Correct. And it is not trivial.
Its def not trivial.
https://wiki.centos.org/About/Building_8
That's why when there is a new major RHEL release it takes months to get the CentOS release.
Oracle gets it in fast. A lot of that delay is intentional.
You have a different definition of fast than I do. Oracle, a 40 billion dollar company who actually makes money off of the release took over 2 months to release 8.
CentOS who is a small subset of Red Hat who makes no money off of CentOS took 4 months.
No matter how you look at it, it's not trivial.
-
Rocky Linux is a community enterprise operating system designed to be 100% bug-for-bug compatible with America's top enterprise Linux distribution now that its downstream partner has shifted direction. It is under intensive development by the community. Rocky Linux is led by Gregory Kurtzer, founder of the CentOS project. There is no ETA for a release. Contributors are asked to reach out using the communication options offered on this site.
-
Interesting Development:
-
@VoIP_n00b said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
Interesting Development:
See that should've been an initial statement from RHEL.
"We're ending the CentOS line, but are offering 16 production servers for free as a part of this change"
The way this was handled was still horribly performed and has likely killed the RHEL userbase off from trusting anything from RHEL/IBM.
-
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@VoIP_n00b said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
Interesting Development:
See that should've been an initial statement from RHEL.
"We're ending the CentOS line, but are offering 16 production servers for free as a part of this change"
The way this was handled was still horribly performed and has likely killed the RHEL userbase off from trusting anything from RHEL/IBM.
16 servers? What good is that though? Just use Oracle and you have no limit. No matter how you slice it IBM has ruined Red Hat as most people predicted.
-
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@VoIP_n00b said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
Interesting Development:
See that should've been an initial statement from RHEL.
"We're ending the CentOS line, but are offering 16 production servers for free as a part of this change"
The way this was handled was still horribly performed and has likely killed the RHEL userbase off from trusting anything from RHEL/IBM.
16 servers? What good is that though? Just use Oracle and you have no limit. No matter how you slice it IBM has ruined Red Hat as most people predicted.
Well I understand your point, the offer of 16 servers isn't much. For many other organizations it may be plenty.
In either case the damage has been done by IBM/RHEL.
-
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@VoIP_n00b said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
Interesting Development:
See that should've been an initial statement from RHEL.
"We're ending the CentOS line, but are offering 16 production servers for free as a part of this change"
The way this was handled was still horribly performed and has likely killed the RHEL userbase off from trusting anything from RHEL/IBM.
16 servers? What good is that though? Just use Oracle and you have no limit. No matter how you slice it IBM has ruined Red Hat as most people predicted.
For most SMB, that use CentOS in house, it is likely more than enough.
I have a client with 6 internal Linux systems, Proxy server, Nextcloud, Salt master (testing still, need ot get back to that), file server, jump box, and Email relay. If you add their phone system hosted on Vultr, then they have 7.
-
@JaredBusch said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@VoIP_n00b said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
Interesting Development:
See that should've been an initial statement from RHEL.
"We're ending the CentOS line, but are offering 16 production servers for free as a part of this change"
The way this was handled was still horribly performed and has likely killed the RHEL userbase off from trusting anything from RHEL/IBM.
16 servers? What good is that though? Just use Oracle and you have no limit. No matter how you slice it IBM has ruined Red Hat as most people predicted.
For most SMB, that use CentOS in house, it is likely more than enough.
I have a client with 6 internal Linux systems, Proxy server, Nextcloud, Salt master (testing still, need ot get back to that), file server, jump box, and Email relay. If you add their phone system hosted on Vultr, then they have 7.
I'm assuming they aren't on a supported cloud environment. You still have to follow their licensing limitations vs just using Oracle. This whole thing is only going to make Oracle money.
-
@stacksofplates anyone or their cousin can register as a developer and use the system for production.
Here's my personal account.
-
While the changes don't take effect until Feb 1, I see nothing that indicates a cost is going to be applied to it.
-
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates anyone or their cousin can register as a developer and use the system for production.
Here's my personal account.
Yes I also have a developer account. The 16 production workloads are for the cloud subscription. As the article mentioned.
-
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
While the changes don't take effect until Feb 1, I see nothing that indicates a cost is going to be applied to it.
No one said anything about cost.
-
I don't see how any of this matters. It doesn't really effect IT. It's more of a dev problem. They are the ones who choose to design their software strategy based on the Centos release cycle and therefore dictate what IT has to use to use their software.
If those devs switch to something else, then we can too. It's up to them in the end anyways. Yes we have our preferences, we can use whatever we want so long as it's available and updated on our OS choice. Nothing changes in the end with the Centos Stream. If that's what your software choice needs, then just use it for that and you don't really have to worry about anything.
-
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates anyone or their cousin can register as a developer and use the system for production.
Here's my personal account.
Yes I also have a developer account. The 16 production workloads are for the cloud subscription. As the article mentioned.
I think you're believing that this is tied to Redhat's Cloud offering, it's not. It's tied to your account with redhat, for sure. (So you can download it). But you can download and run this anywhere.
At least that's how I'm reading this.
-
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates anyone or their cousin can register as a developer and use the system for production.
Here's my personal account.
Yes I also have a developer account. The 16 production workloads are for the cloud subscription. As the article mentioned.
I think you're believing that this is tied to Redhat's Cloud offering, it's not. It's tied to your account with redhat, for sure. (So you can download it). But you can download and run this anywhere.
At least that's how I'm reading this.
You're correct. I just read that and came to post. The wording in the other article was confusing and made it seem like they needed to be deployed on a supported cloud provider.
However, I still don't think it's worth going through the trouble to download from Red Hat vs just downloading Oracle and not needing to do anything.
One thing I wonder is if you have a paid subscription for something like Gluster, Ceph, Satellite (not that you would for 16 servers but I mean any subscription) do you now have to pay for the host it's on? Do the terms of any of those pieces of software require the systems they're on to have a valid license?
Just thinking about that took more time than downloading the Oracle ISO.
-
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
However, I still don't think it's worth going through the trouble to download from Red Hat vs just downloading Oracle and not needing to do anything.
Agreed. Only if I had some reason to need the brand RHEL, but at this time I've not needed RHEL and got by with only using CentOS.
-
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates anyone or their cousin can register as a developer and use the system for production.
Here's my personal account.
Yes I also have a developer account. The 16 production workloads are for the cloud subscription. As the article mentioned.
I think you're believing that this is tied to Redhat's Cloud offering, it's not. It's tied to your account with redhat, for sure. (So you can download it). But you can download and run this anywhere.
At least that's how I'm reading this.
You're correct. I just read that and came to post. The wording in the other article was confusing and made it seem like they needed to be deployed on a supported cloud provider.
However, I still don't think it's worth going through the trouble to download from Red Hat vs just downloading Oracle and not needing to do anything.
One thing I wonder is if you have a paid subscription for something like Gluster, Ceph, Satellite (not that you would for 16 servers but I mean any subscription) do you now have to pay for the host it's on? Do the terms of any of those pieces of software require the systems they're on to have a valid license?
Just thinking about that took more time than downloading the Oracle ISO.
Why wouldn't they? They sure do in the Windows World.
-
@Dashrender said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@DustinB3403 said in The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream:
@stacksofplates anyone or their cousin can register as a developer and use the system for production.
Here's my personal account.
Yes I also have a developer account. The 16 production workloads are for the cloud subscription. As the article mentioned.
I think you're believing that this is tied to Redhat's Cloud offering, it's not. It's tied to your account with redhat, for sure. (So you can download it). But you can download and run this anywhere.
At least that's how I'm reading this.
You're correct. I just read that and came to post. The wording in the other article was confusing and made it seem like they needed to be deployed on a supported cloud provider.
However, I still don't think it's worth going through the trouble to download from Red Hat vs just downloading Oracle and not needing to do anything.
One thing I wonder is if you have a paid subscription for something like Gluster, Ceph, Satellite (not that you would for 16 servers but I mean any subscription) do you now have to pay for the host it's on? Do the terms of any of those pieces of software require the systems they're on to have a valid license?
Just thinking about that took more time than downloading the Oracle ISO.
Why wouldn't they? They sure do in the Windows World.
RedHat is after all the Microsoft of linux.
CentOS is really for those that want RHEL and the work that RedHat put in their distro but without paying for it. I mean that was the entire purpose of it's existence.
I'm surprised it took RedHat this long to kill the project. They basically bailed out CentOS 7 years ago because the project couldn't survive on their own.
