Re: QA: Centos vs SL
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 04:37:37PM -0800, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:22:23PM -0600, davef...@protev.com wrote: Please reread the news coverage and the press releases. My reading between the lines is that CentOS people were made an offer they could not refuse. BTW, today, whois shows centos.org as registered by Red Hat. (Used to be registered by one of the CentOS main developers). Not specifically meant as an answer to you, but as a comment in general: Some open source people (a community I consider myself part of, but not in this sense) tend to act like communists and look at companies acting in the open source world in a suspicious way (this word has already been used in this thread), some maybe even think capitalism is bad in general. Well, some companies indeed are evil and try to hijack and/or abuse open source software and its community. But in general, remember that today's major open source projects couldn't live without the support from (commercial) companies, where Red Hat is even one of the main players. And until now RH has proven to play the game pretty well. Without Red Hat there was not Fedora, no RHEL, no CentOS (also not in the previous incarnation) and no SL. It's understandable that people around the CentOS community look at the RH/CentOS case in a critical way: I also did that myself. But we have to live with the situation and it's not that bad now. Just my $0.02... -- --Jos Vos j...@xos.nl --X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV | Phone: +31 20 6938364 --Amsterdam, The Netherlands| Fax: +31 20 6948204
Re: QA: Centos vs SL
On 11/27/2014 08:58 PM, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Jos Vos j...@xos.nl wrote: Red Hat did not buy CentOS. They employ the principals and own the trademark. Are you saying they got them for free? Agreed with Patrick, i'm watching this whole deal with a suspicion. -- *Karel Lang* *Unix/Linux Administration* l...@afd.cz | +420 731 13 40 40 AUFEER DESIGN, s.r.o. | www.aufeerdesign.cz
Re: QA: Centos vs SL
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 08:25:40PM +0100, Jos Vos wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:22:23PM -0600, davef...@protev.com wrote: Now that Redhat has bought Centos... Red Hat did not buy CentOS. Please reread the news coverage and the press releases. My reading between the lines is that CentOS people were made an offer they could not refuse. BTW, today, whois shows centos.org as registered by Red Hat. (Used to be registered by one of the CentOS main developers). -- Konstantin Olchanski Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow! Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada
Re: QA: Centos vs SL
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 3:34 AM, Karel Lang AFD l...@afd.cz wrote: On 11/27/2014 08:58 PM, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote: On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Jos Vos j...@xos.nl wrote: Red Hat did not buy CentOS. They employ the principals and own the trademark. Are you saying they got them for free? Agreed with Patrick, i'm watching this whole deal with a suspicion. It's a separate issue from should I use CentOS or Scientific Linux in a number of ways. One is that Red Hat has always been very good about publishing as much as possible of their source as compilable freeware or open source, and has strived to make it available and rebuildable by everyone. They have been model citizens, and that should earn them some respect for their motives. I could spend all day analyzing possible motivations, but they've followed the open source and freeware rules and worked very well with 3rd party developers. I applaud their historical behavior. What does or will Scientific Linux have that is better? I've appreciated the Scientific Linux community's support for new users, and their inclusion of hooks for 3rd party repositories such as Repoforge. I've also appreciated that they'd stayed out of burning cycles trying to support Xen based virtualization. And the big kicker for me right now is the inclusion of the third party atrpms, rpmforge, adobe, elrepo, and rpmfusion as available yum configurations. I work in the USA, so I have to be cautious about software patents and the use of libdvdcss, which can decode copy protected DVD's. That means that RHEL, and CentOS with personnel employed by Red Hat, cannot contain the libdvdcss library. And it means that they're unlikely to ever contain links to the atrpms repository, at http://packages.atrpms.net/, where such potentially intellectual property law infringing software may be found. So, for overseas clients not bound by some of these laws and needing audio or dvd tools that are legal in their country, I suggest they consider Scientific Linux and revew the tools made available by yum install yum-conf-atrpms
QA: Centos vs SL
All, I've read a lot of reviews online and a recent pitch at CERN (before presentation!) Now that Redhat has bought Centos... https://www.google.com/#q=rhel+centos+cern+pdf http://linux.web.cern.ch/linux/docs/GDB%2020140212%20-%20Future%20of%20Scientific%20Linux%20in%20light%20of%20recent%20CentOS%20project%20changes..pdf So I'm looking to head towards Centos and wondering how easy it will be to install GEANT...and if I should wait. I am not a power user. ? Thanks
Re: QA: Centos vs SL
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 12:22:23PM -0600, davef...@protev.com wrote: Now that Redhat has bought Centos... Red Hat did not buy CentOS. -- --Jos Vos j...@xos.nl --X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV | Phone: +31 20 6938364 --Amsterdam, The Netherlands| Fax: +31 20 6948204
Re: QA: Centos vs SL
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Jos Vos j...@xos.nl wrote: Red Hat did not buy CentOS. They employ the principals and own the trademark. Are you saying they got them for free?
RE: QA: Centos vs SL
Remember that CERN turns the dates around to show day first. The presentation you linked to dated 12/02/14 was given in February 12 2014. Those slides are pretty old. But CERN did in fact go on to announce they would base on CentOS for version 7. Steve Timm From: owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov [owner-scientific-linux-us...@listserv.fnal.gov] on behalf of davef...@protev.com [davef...@protev.com] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2014 12:22 PM To: scientific-linux-users Subject: QA: Centos vs SL All, I've read a lot of reviews online and a recent pitch at CERN (before presentation!) Now that Redhat has bought Centos... https://www.google.com/#q=rhel+centos+cern+pdf http://linux.web.cern.ch/linux/docs/GDB%2020140212%20-%20Future%20of%20Scientific%20Linux%20in%20light%20of%20recent%20CentOS%20project%20changes..pdf So I'm looking to head towards Centos and wondering how easy it will be to install GEANT...and if I should wait. I am not a power user. ? Thanks
