| |||||||||||||
Commitment to Community(?)Commitment to Community(?)Posted Mar 6, 2011 10:56 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)In reply to: Commitment to Community(?) by makomk Parent article: Commitment to Open (Red Hat News)
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.
(Log in to post comments)
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.
|
|||||||||||||