- cross-posted to:
- fedora@kbin.social
- linux@lemmy.ml
- !ozoned@lemmy.world ( @ozoned@beehaw.org ) English5•1 year ago
Wonder how this affects direct RHEL copies such as Rocky or Alma.
I was at Red Hat when they moved CentOS to Stream and a lot of us were VERY unhappy about it. Kind of knew the writing was on the wall for them when Red Hat hugged them closer.
I don’t get this move, other than to fight direct copies of RHEL, such as Rocky or even Oracle. This might push those folks to have to follow CentOS stream, which is NOT RHEL.
Though I don’t know how the copies do their builds now.
- ipha ( @ipha@beehaw.org ) English4•1 year ago
Shouldn’t affect them much, it just means they’ll need a single RHEL subscription.
- caron ( @caron@lemmy.ca ) English4•1 year ago
It would count as an unauthorized use of the subscription, so Red Hat wouldn’t keep doing business with them, and wouldn’t receive new binaries.
- ipha ( @ipha@beehaw.org ) English6•1 year ago
That sounds like a giant GPL violation if sources are provided under the condition that you don’t use them.
- !ozoned@lemmy.world ( @ozoned@beehaw.org ) English3•1 year ago
Wonder if a dev subscription is enough.
- ipha ( @ipha@beehaw.org ) English6•1 year ago
Legally they must provide source to anyone they provide binaries to.
- cyd ( @cyd@vlemmy.net ) English4•1 year ago
It’s GPL compliant, so there’s no problem. It’s a good thing for companies to explore a variety of business models that are FLOSS-compatible.
- iuseit ( @iuseit@iusearchlinux.fyi ) English4•1 year ago
Come someone smart tell me if this violates GPL?
- reddit_sux ( @reddit_sux@iusearchlinux.fyi ) English9•1 year ago
No.
- Butthurtz ( @Butthurtz@kbin.social ) 1•1 year ago
Generous donors may as well pay for it then share source code to Rocky/Alma