On Friday, June 03, 2011 11:21:35 AM Les Mikesell wrote:
> I'm talking about what would be
> more in the best interest of the community that they attracted by
> permitting redistribution of the collated works - and then cut off.
It's in the best interest of the community to have Red Hat in a financially stable position to fund all this good stuff in the first place. If the only way Red Hat can be financially viable is for me to give up the pre-EL ways, then that's fine by me, especially since Red Hat is rather accommodating in terms of the source code.
> Go back and look at the changelogs of programs in the era between the
> RH 4.x and 9 releases if you don't remember how bad the stuff they initially
> shipped was or how it got fixed.
Got back and look at the changelogs of the PostgreSQL packages.
> More to the point, wasn't that the reason you started using Red Hat in
> the first place?
No. I bought Red Hat 4 because it was the only non-proprietary platform on which I could run RealAudio Server back in 1997 and expect to get support from Progressive Networks. Red Hat being a North Carolina company was a great bonus. And while I would like to be an idealist, at the same time I know without doubt that I, and many others, use CentOS precisely because the binary compatibility for running closed source software is so good.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
