[jonathanspw]

Bug for bug is a sham and always was. It's a disservice to users to only clone something.

Underneath it all, compatibility is what matters. At AlmaLinux we still target RHEL minor versions and will continue to do so. We're a clone in the sense of full compatibility but a derivative in the sense that we can do some extra things now. This is far, far better for users and also let's us actually contribute upstream and have more of a mutually beneficial relationship with RH versus just taking.

[bayindirh]

I'll say it depends.

Sometimes the hardware or the software you run requires exact versions of the packages with some specific behavior to work correctly. These include drivers' parts on both kernel and userland, some specific application which requires a very specific version of a library, so on and so forth.

I for one, can use Alma for 99% of the time instead of the old CentOS, but it's not always possible, if you're running cutting edge datacenter hardware. And when you run that hardware as a research center, this small distinction cuts a lot deeper.

Otherwise, taking the LEAPP and migrating to Alma or Rocky for that matter is a no-brainer for an experienced groups of admins. But, when computer says no, there's no arguing in that.

[carlwgeorge]

If you're running cutting edge datacenter hardware, CentOS is a better fit now than it ever has been before. It will be the first to get support for new hardware within a major version, ahead of RHEL and all it's derivatives. It is possible that some hardware doesn't get support within the current major version of any of these related distros, and you'll have to wait until the next major version, which CentOS also does first before the rest.

[jonathanspw]

We don't change the expected versions. We might patch/backport more to them if there are issues, but the versions remain.

Basically the goal is still to fit the exact situation you just brought up. I'm not aware of this ever not being the case if it weren't to be the case for some reason, then we have a problem we need to fix.

All of the extra stuff we do, patch, etc. is with exactly what you just stated in mind.

[bayindirh]

I'll be installing a set of small servers in the near future. I'll be retrying Alma in a couple of them, to give it another chance.

As I said, in some cases Rocky is a better CentOS replacement than Alma is.

But to be crystal clear, I do not discount Alma as a distribution or belittle the effort behind it. Derivative, clone or from scratch, keeping a distro alive is a tremendous amount of work. I did it, and know it.

It's just me selecting the tools depending on a suitability score, and pragmatism. Not beef, not fanaticism, nothing in that vein.

[jonathanspw]

Sustainability is one of the core reasons why we are not using RHEL SRPMs to build AlmaLinux. RH doesn't want us doing that, and doing so would be unsustainable and bring into question the future of AlmaLinux as it can, and likely will, turn into a game of cat/mouse getting those SRPMs :)

Let us know if you have any issues!