Re: Upstream and downstream (was Re: What are the differences between systemd and non-systemd Linux distros?)

[Warren Young <warren@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Oct 18, 2018, at 6:52 PM, Japheth Cleaver <cleaver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Conoboy, on the other hand, takes great pains during the speech to describe a much more fluid and complex interaction between CentOS and its upstream, and puts forth CentOS as a mechanism (perhaps the best mechanism) for the winder EL community to contribute (something?) back into RHEL's future.

I don’t see a change as significant as a new (or old!) init system making its way up from CentOS or Fedora to RHEL.

But hey, if you wanted to spend your time trying, that’s a *far* better use of your time than griping about systemd on mailing lists.

I think forking CentOS 5 or 6 is less effort, but hey, your time, your project.

If anyone out there is thinking this is too much work, some of the major Linux distributions are, or were at one point, largely one-person efforts.  It is certainly not a lot of work, but you don’t need a multibillion dollar company to fork CentOS.

Both projects could fail, and it would still be a much better signal to Red Hat what the people want.  Again: working code argues best.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos