Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by throwaway_9034 1080 days ago
So you think Red Hat's engineering efforts mean nothing because their product is licensed under many open source licenses?

That seems unfair when Rocky/CIQ explicitly uses Red Hat's 10-year support as an advertisement point and contribute nothing to that fair?

https://ciq.com/support/rocky-linux/

    With regular updates and a 10-year committed support lifecycle for each
    major release, Rocky Linux is ideal for use in enterprise environments. It
    is easy to migrate from CentOS and other RHEL-derived Linux distributions, 
    and it is secure and scalable.
Looking at this, what is the cost for CIQ here? What is the cost for Red Hat?
1 comments
geerlingguy 1079 days ago
That's a business concern, and it's one of the common issues those who charge for services and platforms on top of GPL-licensed software run into.
link
throwaway_9034 1078 days ago
That's actually not true. The whole move is a business concern, that's evident from all the announcements.

Platforms on top of GPL-licensed can promise all they want but still live under the control of the community and that's part of the business many companies like Google, Meta, Obsidian are in.

Selling, and entering into an agreement, the support you don't own based exclusively on the work of another third-party that actually promises that, that's at the very least not right. CIQ/Rocky can't do anything on top of Rocky Linux because of their bug-for-bug compatibility and this decision and message benefits CIQ and not Rocky Linux users. That's also evident.

Rocky Linux could go on using CentOS Stream as an upstream with the help of Red Hat, but CIQ made the business decision to push for a RHEL clone, not the Rocky Linux user community.

You talk about morals, but if you can't see the morals here I don't think you really understand how this whole business works.

link