Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by worthless-trash 1084 days ago
In this case, is the change you imagine GPLv4 would say "you cant prevent anyone, at any point from downloading the source code from a project you create" because that is super slippery slope?

I'd also like to ask, what damage do you see this change in behavior doing to free software ecosystem ?
2 comments
happymellon 1084 days ago
It seems pretty mad. Apparently Redhat doing all of their work as GPL'ed OpenSource and upstreaming everything so that everyone benefits, and anyone can take the software and build their own, sell it, etc, isn't good enough.

Is literally the only thing that would make people happy is to give away RHEL for free for people to run their production servers on?

link
geerlingguy 1084 days ago
Part of the open source social contract is downstreaming too. You can't just take, promise to give back, and then hoard what you've built.
link
happymellon 1084 days ago
There is no hording though.

What changes have they made to RHEL that isn't available?

link
mackca 1084 days ago
downstreaming ? How is the open source social contract anymore than making source code available?
link
geerlingguy 1084 days ago
That's what I mean. Not putting up a EULA dam. They don't have to build CentOS or assist anyone, but they can't block the code from flowing downhill.
link
mackca 1084 days ago
According to Red Hat the source of RHEL is publicly available on CentOS Stream Gitlab, without a EULA.
link
bubblethink 1083 days ago
It's the upstream source, not the source used to build RHEL. RHEL is downstream of CentOS stream. Much like linux kernel's source is available, it does not help you much.
link
geerlingguy 1084 days ago
The damage is corporations could now determine whether they classify downstream use of open source code as "valuable" or "not valuable", and determine (according to their own rubrics) whether to effectively end the open source gravy train in their own ecosystem, or be a member of the open source community and share alike.

Despite every attempt by Red Hat employees to call out CentOS Stream as being "Red Hat sources", it is not. If they wish to participate in the open source ecosystem, they can't coerce customers (paid or not) into a particular (very proprietary) usage pattern with their software. No matter how many tens/hundreds/thousands of employees they hire to code for open source projects.

link
mackca 1084 days ago
So Red Hat is saying that CentOS Stream is how RHEL is built, you are saying it is not. Can you show the difference in packages from CentOS Stream and RHEL? Rocky says they pull packages from CentOS Stream, and with their project goal remaining 1:1 binary compatibility then that must be the case.
link
geerlingguy 1084 days ago
So far I have talked to two individual developers who have not been able to reproduce a RHEL 9.2 build only using what's available in Stream.
link