Re: EL 6 rollout strategies? (Scientific Linux)

[Radu Gheorghiu <radu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 05/16/2011 11:50 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 5/16/2011 3:38 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
>> On 05/16/11 1:18 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> Yes, but whatever can't be automated here should benefit from doing the
>>> trial-and-error in parallel.   And the potential improvements might come
>>> in the automation process as much as the grunge work - you can't really
>>> predict how an open project will develop.
>> so you are volunteering to take over 4.next or 5.x or whatever when the
>> time comes ?  you can come up with the build infrastructure and develop
>> this automation in the meantime?  I'd suggest starting with recreating
>> 5.6 by working from 5.5 and the RHEL 5,6 SRPMs exclusively.  let us know
>> how long it takes from scratch, ok?   you don't mind that
>> we-the-community would want our packagers vetted by demonstrating the
>> ability to deliver...  consider this a test run.
> No, but I'm not the only member of the public.  And your suggestion of
> starting by reproducing someone else's work from scratch instead of
> building on it would be like Linus telling everyone to just write their
> own unix-like kernel before trying to add to it.  If he had done that
> instead of letting others build on the existing work we wouldn't be
> talking about usable Linux distributions today at all.
>
The main "fear" the developers have is that somebody could steal their 
work and come up with
another RHEL clone easily if they release their build system & scripts. 
I think this is obvious by now.
It is also pretty obvious that the developers have a strong hope that by 
keeping CentOS closed,
somebody will notice their skills and will pay them a fortune for their 
knowledge by hiring them.
This is my opinion and it is based on what I read on this list during 
the last months.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos