On 12/01/16 20:30, Mark Stodola wrote:
Since this is becoming a top-post thread, I will continue
the trend.
CentOS does not offer a support contract like RHEL. Why
would a company compete with itself? It is essentially a
community supported release of RHEL, just like SL.
Of course, some one please correct me if I am wrong here...
This is not a new topic, and was discussed at length when
RedHat announced the acquisition of CentOS and changes to
the build process. To my knowledge, the SL team had
discussions with the CentOS and RedHat people on how to
move forward. The SL team decided to continue as a
complete separate distribution instead of become in extra
repository/site for the foreseeable future.
One of the key features I like about SL is the ability to
stay on a specific point release and still receive
relevant updates. There are probably several other reasons
Connie or Pat could elaborate on as well.
In the end, it is up to personal/company preference with
any distribution you chose to use. That is part of what
open source is about. Arguing for distribution
usage/mergers doesn't really do anything productive here
in a users' mailing list.
Of course it does.
When somebody mentions fondness towards the support SL
offers - what does it mean? - I always thought SL support
has always been exclusively community(users) based +
contributing developers. Am I wrong and missing that
somewhere there we can get some extra level of support?
Now, CERN and affiliates, associates, whatever or whoever
decides to follow this path is going to drift a bit away, if
not completely. There was one scientificLinux both great
labs shared - now they are parting away in a sense. The same
would happen with users. Opensource community, though the
greatest in the world had always had problems coming together.
And "complete separate distribution" I think is a bit abused
notion in case of SL. I've been a SL user for many years and
I'm grateful for it. Even if only for the fact that one can
get such a great product in its entirety without getting
tied up in some commercial contracts, greedy and doggy as
they usually are.
I don't want to argue superiority of one over the other in
terms of point-release, updates and/or their promptness, I
did not mean to, not much to argue there, anybody can check
it themselves.
If it was discussed here on the list before I apologize - I
must have rushed my search for the topic on the list, I only
found a 2014 old topic and then CERN's news about 2015 move.
I've learned what I sought, many thanks.
-Mark
On 01/12/2016 02:10 PM, Miles O'Neal wrote:
Has CentOS got support yet? My employer moved to RHEL
because we got
tired of fighting third party vendors over their support
on non-RHEL
platforms, but I personally always found SL to be more
consistent and
quicker to release... and they had much better support.
On 01/12/2016 02:04 PM, lejeczek wrote:
hi,
after my first post I made a move, I should say a
smaller rather, I
did migrate a small HA cluster from SL7.1 to Centos7.2.
Instructions to do that I'm sure everybody can easily
look up, just
one tiny manual intervention was needed above what is
already covered
by a doc on Centos website.
But most importantly nothing broke, all the usual
servers, web, mail,
other net related services including HA carried on
seamlessly.
Like I said earlier, and everybody knows, a lot, a lot
is already
shared, differences boil down to maybe a philosophy
behind each
organization responsible for each snip-off, some
organizational and
administrative processes, protocols.
Slight advantage seems that Centos offers, but expected
as they are
closer to the source in the lifecycle supply chain, is
higher revision
of some rpm packages, I see I get slightly newer kernel
for example, etc.
If I was to voice my opinion out - and scientific devel
& other
responsible culprits are listening - then I say: go for
it, get
together, merge userbase, share devel jobs, duties, etc.
Merge/share
or even better, tell Redhat we want to use their, shared
by all, bug
reporting system.
I've decided, I'll be moving over to Centos, gradually
but surely.
Note, one thing to remember if you did SL -> Centos,
afterwards, is
yum repos, make sure what you have enabled there.
cheers
On 12/01/16 09:48, lejeczek wrote:
hi everybody,
I've wondered and got curious, what do you guys, gals
think about
that move?
More importantly do you think it's a step we SL users
should also
consider?
CERN mention there were talks between them, Fermilab -
what are
Fermilab plans with regards to future releases, with
regards to SL in
general? (Not much info on the website.)
I personally am just about to trial a migration from
SL7 to Centos.
I'm thinking it's inevitable, am I wrong?
best wishes.
--
Miles O'Neal
CAD Systems Engineer
Cirrus Logic | cirrus.com | 1.512.851.4659
