On 10/30/2011 02:14 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic wrote:
> Vreme: 10/30/2011 01:44 PM, William Warren piše:
>> And that Johnny has been the answer we have been requesting for a
>> looooong time now. I figured the upstream packaging changes broke your
>> systems even when lance said that wasn't the case. The results speak
>> for themselves. Nothing against the Centos folks you are now being
>> actively worked against by Redhat itself. This is going to slowly choke
>> off community builds of RHEL...and force them to fedora. Due to this
>> decicion byt he upstream is why I'm moving to Ubuntu LTS for my new
>> servers. It is unfortunate that the abuse by Orcale of the exact
>> procedure you use that prompted Red Hat to take these packaging measures.
>
> I do not think there is much to be worried for now. Most/all security
> patches will come out fairly fast now that CR repo is in place.
>
> If need be, there can always be another repo that will be reserved for
> fast fixes that are not compatible with RHEL, like package with
> important fix that is not exactly compatible, but does the job same as
> upstream package. This would be only for unresolved packages with
> important fix, and only as long as complete fix is not completed.
But this approach has been rejected in the past with the argument that all
builds need to be binary compatible with upstream.
This begs the question if the centos project still considers itself viable?
It's one thing to lag behind because of technical difficulties but another
if the upstream provider essentially wants to prevent you from doing what
you are doing. In that case the project probably doesn't have much of a
future because even if it gets back on track with reasonably timely
releases then upstream will probably just react by making it even harder to
build a clone.
Regards,
Dennis
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
