> The arguments they gave to me were, what happen if redhat close the
> base packages, they don't have to release them, but just to the buyer,
> and we can't buy the distro, there are others distros like debian that
> is totally free, and without dependencies of proprietary industry.
>
They may want to re-read the GPL and related licenses. 99.9% of the
software in RHEL is GPL, which means they can charge for it all they
want, but whoever buys it can re-release it as they see fit. Given
that RHEL is in the habit of buying things and releasing them to the
FOSS community (Netscape Directory anyone?) I don't see them closing
anything in the near future. It's not really the software RH is trying
to charge people for, so much as it's the support, licensing and
reliability that gives bosses the peace of mind they want.
> I really struggle a little more to defend, CentOS and my comfort on it
> ;) , but have not solids arguments about that issue, I really never
> worried about it.
>
> Would some of you explain me this issue, or point me somewhere to
> read?. I'll really appreciate that.
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
--
Jim Perrin
System Architect - UIT
Ft Gordon & US Army Signal Center
