On Tue, Dec 15, 2020, 12:07 PM Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 11:24:03AM -0600, Tom Bishop wrote:
> > I know you and other RHEL folks keep saying this about cashing out etc,
> but
> > they could have kept stream and Centos stable at the same time but chose
> > not to. Ya know, if it walks like a duck and quacks as a duck...who knows
> > maybe this goes down as one of the best decisions ever for RH but I think
> > its going to hurt them in more ways then they ever thought about.
>
> As I've also said before, I have no special insight into how RH and the
> CentOS board came to this timeline, but I _am_ inclined to believe that the
> motivation is the one that they give: they want to focus attention and
> resources. Look at CloudLinux saying that they plan to invest a million
> dollars a year into doing their rebuild. It's easy to _say_ "Red Hat could
> easily have done both".
>
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Fedora Project Leader
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
Please, yeah poor, poor Redhat, they are struggling these days, *cough*
they needed to do this in order to survive. I thought it didn't have
anything to do with cashing in. Really it's there choice if the decide to
run it into the ground or not, to many bean counters get involved and it
all becomes about making money, nowhere close to the original ideals for
the company when it was started.
>
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
