On 8/19/06, Dag Wieers <dag@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Let me reply to something that gave a bad taste in my mouth.
On Sat, 19 Aug 2006, Alain Reguera wrote:
> On 8/19/06, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sat, 19 Aug 2006, Alain Reguera wrote:
> >
> > > Our question was, why continue using something that they don't want we
> > > use, even in a rebuild from them?, but even worst when we reached to
> > > love them?. (please, no offence here)
> >
> > I dont understand your question. Who is the 'they' and who is the 'we',
> > and who do you love ?
>
> with "they" I refer to redhat (the main builder, who give the sources)
>
> with "we" I refer to my friends and I, and maybe the others that could
> be in the same situation of us.
So your question implies that they (Red Hat) do not want us (you and
your friends) to use CentOS ? I don't agree with your implication.
maybe you are not in the list I refer as "we". would like to know how
you'll feel if you see your country in the line 67-68 of this file:
http://olpc.download.redhat.com/olpc/rawhide-snapshots/2006-05-27-0237/eula.txt
for a minute, feel like one of "we" and maybe you have the answer that
is needed. (please, I appreciate your comment, don't confuse mine)
maybe there is or there is no legal implication at using CentOS (and
don't care, what the (fedora|redhat )'s eula.txt file says) ... and
that is what I ("we") need to know. Since a legal point of view.
What if you otherwise would use Windows, Ubuntu, SuSE, MacOS X ?
I'm pretty sure that Red Hat prefers you use CentOS instead of something
non Red Hat.
Also it helps people to learn to know the product, or run it at home at no
cost while using it at work with Red Hat's support. Again, something I'm
sure Red Hat prefers than most other options.
But then I wonder why you would care what Red Hat thinks about something
they support (indirectly).
not what redhat thinks about an indirect support, but the propagation
of its laws to what is indirectly supported by them and its
implication to those countries which appear in the fedora (and think
redhat) 's eula.txt file.
supported? think no, but dependent yes. That's what I understand after
read johnny explanation about the relation between redhat and centos
(if don't misunderstood the idea).
but again ... think I need a lawyer.
CentOS offers them more people to test-run
their distribution. It provides RHEL users with more documentation and a
much bigger community they can take advantage of.
In an interview with Fedora's Project Leader Max Spevack this was said:
Spevack is especially interested in encouraging distributions like
CentOS that are based upon Fedora or RHEL. "I would hope that these
people would think of Fedora Project as their upstream, and that they
would want to help us," he says. "Because that ends up being a direct
benefit to them."
Fedora Board chair looks ahead
http://os.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/05/15/1729249&from=rss
CentOS has lots of advantages for Red Hat and its customers. They may not
admit it explicitly in public, but it's hard to deny.
I don't question those things Dag, indeed think of those things as
"love", what I question is the name of my country in a discriminatory
way on one fedora's official file (and then redhat).
Kind regards,
-- dag wieers, dag@xxxxxxxxxx, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[all I want is a warm bed and a kind word and unlimited power]
my Regards to you and your Time
Al.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
