> About Oracle as alternative. Oracle Linux is not an alternative to
> CentOS but for RHEL and if I will force to pay for enteprise system
> currently I will pay RHEL, not OL. Over this, OL is not the only
> enterprise distro that a "user" could choose. If support is needed there
> are SUSE (SLES) and Ubuntu. For who that don't need support there are
> Debian, Ubuntu, OpenSUSE (I'm talking about the most used but you know
> that slackware,FreeBSD are in that list), so many alternatives are in place.
I think it's particularly disappointing *if* this is a "policy" from RH
since the other major RHEL clone, Scientific Linux, has not produced an
EL8 offering in favour of using CentOS.
I think all of us here understand the hugely complex process of
producing a quality OS, even when it's "just" a clone of another one.
The official sanctioning from RH was touted as a two-way process:
community input into RHEL and RH support and help of the cloning and
build process. It would be a bit underhand if it turned out that it was
RH's way of creating a two tier system: buy RHEL+support and get timely
updates; use CentOS for free, get security updates, but wait two months
for each upgrade.
P.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
