Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
Commitment to Community(?)Commitment to Community(?)Posted Mar 6, 2011 2:01 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)In reply to: Commitment to Community(?) by jrn Parent article: Commitment to Open (Red Hat News)
Vanilla 2.6.32 is pretty different from what is included in RHEL 6 in so many ways. Not a very relevant platform for coordination for Red Hat.
(Log in to post comments)
Commitment to Community(?) Posted Mar 6, 2011 10:36 UTC (Sun) by makomk (guest, #51493) [Link] Except that as someone pointed out earlier, the maintainer of the official 2.6.32 long-term release has said that Red Hat's refusal to publish broken-out patches for their kernel has made maintaining it as a long-term release harder for them. In fact, if you recall the original LWN article, the only reason we found out about this in the first place is because it was obstructing the 2.6.32-series maintainers!
Commitment to Community(?) Posted Mar 6, 2011 10:56 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
The fact that Red Hat picked 2.6.32 as a base kernel to build on for EL 6 doesn't seem to part of any coordinated effort. It just happens to fall in the right timeline. In the case of EL6, we are talking about 7 to 10 years with increased divergence over a period of time considering the enterprise model of backporting fixes or in some cases rewriting or creating new patches because upstream has moved ahead in a different way.
The decision to maintain 2.6.32 series for a longer term is a independent one and while there is a small level of intersection between them at this point, that won't last. It is unfortunate, certainly that stable release process is not made easier now but the individual patches get pushed upstream anyway and the fixes end up in the Linus tree and the benefits shared.
Commitment to Community(?) Posted Mar 7, 2011 23:40 UTC (Mon) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]
Blame Oracle. No one wants to say it but they are the problem. Redhat never had a major issue with CentOS, but when Oracle showed up, copied RHEL, renamed it and tried to start poaching Redhat's clients that created the problem. Obviously Redhat has lost some clients do to this and is going to make Oracle spend some cash to simply copy them.
It's too bad some companies are only interested in the revenue and not supporting the community. I'd personally like to see this hurt Oracles revenue to the point that the entire project is killed. This is the result of a bad community member and it would be better if they just went away.
Commitment to Community(?) Posted Mar 8, 2011 0:32 UTC (Tue) by jmalcolm (guest, #8876) [Link]
I think that Novell had a hand in it too but yes, Oracle seems quite happy to be the tragedy in the commons.
|
|||||||||||||