Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Richard B. Pyne]

Look at Rocky Linux rockylinux.org It is set to become what CentOS was 
before it was sucked in by RH and sold to IBM, a Community Enterprise OS.


On 12/8/2020 8:15 AM, Pete Biggs wrote:


Forgive a bit of cynicism ...

On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 09:06 -0500, Rich Bowen wrote:

The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next
year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat
Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a
current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end
at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as
the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.


"If you want to keep using RHEL for free, you will have to put up with
making sure that our paying customers get better quality releases"



Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux
7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of
the RHEL 7 life cycle.
https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates


"If you really want to have a stable release for free, stick to 7"



CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in
collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This
ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the next
version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather
than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS
contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of RHEL.


"CentOS will become the developer playground"


And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux
distribution ecosystem.


Was there any confusion? If there is, then it's caused by the
introduction of things like "CentOS Stream".  There was never any
confusion when it was a straight rebuild.



When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will
be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS
Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases.
If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are
concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you
to contact Red Hat about options.


"If you want a production environment, pay for it"



We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your
information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of
project focus might affect you.


The FAQ generally says "if you want a RHEL environment, then pay for
it"



[See also: Red Hat's perspective on this.
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]


Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to make
sure it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any resources
into it"

So as far as I can see all the RHEL rebuilds are dead now - WhiteBox,
Scientific Linux, now CentOS. Are there any left?

P.




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Ljubomir Ljubojevic]

On 12/10/20 5:28 PM, mark wrote:
> On 12/9/20 9:32 AM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:41 AM Pete Biggs  wrote:
>>
 I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
> aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in
> the
> future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it
> won't be
> 
>> As CentOS Stream grows, I expect many companies who sell hardware will
>> become active members of the community.
>>
> I expect them to leave. In the real world, we had EXTREMELY limited
> windows to update servers and workstations. To expect people to do daily
> updates is asking for management, as well as the users, to scream bloody
> murder. Most are *not* that technical, and will start blaming the update
> for something else not working, and management will hear *them*.
> 
> I was chased off RH after RH 9, when it went to pay for licenses (and I
> was "between positions"), and came back, because I *like* the RH
> architecture. but I'm considering ubuntu now.

There is Springdale RHEL clone made by Princeton University...

-- 
Ljubomir Ljubojevic
(Love is in the Air)
PL Computers
Serbia, Europe

StarOS, Mikrotik and CentOS/RHEL/Linux consultant
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Gionatan Danti]

Il 2020-12-10 18:40 Brendan Conoboy ha scritto:

Hey, you dropped Centos-devel from your reply.  I'll assume that was
intentional, but if it wasn't feel free to quote any of this back
there.


Hi Brendan, no, it was not intentional - I replied from the smartphone 
and I accidentally dropped the centos-devel list. I'll reply quoting the 
entire conversation to let others read your useful information.



On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 9:26 AM Gionatan Danti 
wrote:


Il 2020-12-10 14:35 Brendan Conoboy ha scritto:

- are you going to keep stable ABI between Stream kernel

releases,

or
should we expect each kernel to break 3rd party drivers/modules?


All our kernel changes are implemented against the kernel ABI-

there

is no point in time during release development when we have

interim

changes in the kernel that ignore the symbols in the whitelist.

So

basically if your experience of going from one minor release to
another has been smooth, the incremental kernels between those two
releases would also tend to run smooth, assuming whatever motions
happen with the 3rd party drivers/modules behind the scenes

continue

to happen (for example, rebuilding from source).


Let's forget about minor release upgrades and focus on the
incremental
kernel updates between point releases for a moment. Can we expect a
stable kernel ABI for these releases, or should we expect breaking
changes? In other words, should 3rd party kmod be constantly updated
for
*any* kernel released on the Stream channel, or can we expect them
to
keep working until a "next-release" kernel appears?

Regarding symbol whitelist, I understand it as related to a single
minor
releases - ie: all kernels of 8.3 branch will obey it, but this can
be
false for kernel on, say, 8.4

Am I missing something?


I think it's a question of nuance.  In broad strokes we don't break
the kernel ABI as outlined by the whitelist starting with the first
major release.  In fact, taht whitelist grows throughout the life of
the release, making the ABI more predictable.  The problem you've
likely experienced is that loadable kernel modules have access to
symbols not included in the whitelist.  Whether we're pushing new code
upstream or backporting new code from upstream, we endeavor to keep
symbols the same, even if they aren't on the whitelist.  But if for
strong technical reasons it's better to change a symbol, that will
happen upstream, and if it wasn't part of our whitelist, it can happen
in RHEL as well.  Usually these changes only require minor updates in
the loadable kernel modules, but for an end user this is the
difference between a module loading or not loading, so the impact is
glaring.

I'm not sure how things will take shape with CentOS Stream and
external drivers, whether some gating activity wil elrepo will hold
back kernel updates until elrepo is updated, or if a SIG will form, or
some other thing.  All I can say for sure is that when you have a
group of people with common problems, they will create solutions, and
we want those solutions for CentOS Stream.  So we'll work it out, I'm
just not sure how yet (kABI isn't my focus, I'm simply familiar with
the dynamics because I was the overall RHEL 8 development lead).


- what/how many synchronization points are going to be with RHEL
releases?


I'm not sure I'm interpreting your question correctly, could you
restate?  I don't want to hit you with detailed process

information

only to find out I'm answering the wrong question!


With Stream, all is going to change constantly. We will have any
"sync
point" where Stream is 100% identical to a specific RHEL point
release?


OK, I understand now, thanks!  I don't think there will be a point
where a RHEL minor release compose will be NVR identical to a CentOS
Stream compose, though they will be pretty close.  The reason for this
is that there is a period of time where we're working on 2 RHEL
releases at once: The one that is about to release, and the one that
will follow.  CentOS Stream, I believe, will follow the source tree of
"the one that will follow."  All the same fixes will be there, but
CentOS Stream will also get additional fixes and features not included
in the near term RHEL release.


Thank you for taking the time to reply.
Regards.


I appreciate the questions!  Regards,


Thank you for the clear replies.
Regards.

--
Danti Gionatan
Supporto Tecnico
Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
email: g.da...@assyoma.it - i...@assyoma.it
GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[mark]

On 12/9/20 9:32 AM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:41 AM Pete Biggs  wrote:


I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release

aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be



As CentOS Stream grows, I expect many companies who sell hardware will
become active members of the community.

I expect them to leave. In the real world, we had EXTREMELY limited 
windows to update servers and workstations. To expect people to do daily 
updates is asking for management, as well as the users, to scream bloody 
murder. Most are *not* that technical, and will start blaming the update 
for something else not working, and management will hear *them*.


I was chased off RH after RH 9, when it went to pay for licenses (and I 
was "between positions"), and came back, because I *like* the RH 
architecture. but I'm considering ubuntu now.


mark
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Sergio Belkin]

El mar, 8 dic 2020 a las 13:44, Nicolas Kovacs ()
escribió:

> Le 08/12/2020 à 16:12, Johnny Hughes a écrit :
> > Another very good thing
> >
> > There is no longer a huge delay of a drop of 750 packages at once and a
> > delay of more than a month to get a new release.
> >
> > There will be on delay in stream .. it will be a constantly rolling
> > distribution .. updates will happen all the time with no 'big drop' at
> > point release time.
>
> When I read the first messages of this thread, I was quite concerned. But
> having read through your detailed explanations, let me state that I'm
> reassured.
>
> As a sysadmin, what I like about CentOS is that it's probably the most
> *boring*
> Linux distribution out there. Boring is good. No drama, no surprises. I
> know I
> can have yum-cron run once a day without Icinga suddenly sending me a
> tsunami
> of failure alerts and without clients calling me and yelling on the phone.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Niki
>
> --
> Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
> 7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
> Site : https://www.microlinux.fr
> Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr
> Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
> Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
> Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

+1 But for some It centennials progress is about destroying the present.
Smoke as a Service.
-- 
--
Sergio Belkin
LPIC-2 Certified - http://www.lpi.org
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Gianluca Cecchi]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 3:29 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:

> On 12/9/20 9:37 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:
> >
> >> So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
> >> third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
> >> Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need
> >> for my servers.
> > And just to give you some more examples -- ELRepo offers DUD (driver
> > update disk) images for the devices whose support has been dropped in
> > RHEL 8:
> >
> > https://elrepo.org/linux/dud/el8/x86_64/
>
>
> And those DUDs are very much appreciated.  That's how I got the install
> of C8 on those R710s in the first place, after all!
>
>
Me too installing CentOS 8 as hypervisor on Dell M610 with oVirt 4.4.3 (not
possible to use it as ovirt-node-ng due to the missing kernel mode and
impossibility to inject DUD in oVirt NG Node): now upgrading to 8.3 using
kmod-megaraid_sas-07.714.04.00-1.el8_3.elrepo.x86_64
Thanks!

Gianluca
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Lamar Owen]

On 12/9/20 9:37 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:


So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need
for my servers.

And just to give you some more examples -- ELRepo offers DUD (driver
update disk) images for the devices whose support has been dropped in
RHEL 8:

https://elrepo.org/linux/dud/el8/x86_64/



And those DUDs are very much appreciated.  That's how I got the install 
of C8 on those R710s in the first place, after all!


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 1:01 AM Gionatan Danti  wrote:

> Il 2020-12-10 04:55 Brendan Conoboy ha scritto:
> > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> >> > While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
> >> > mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
> >> > drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.
> >> >
> >> So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
> >> third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
> >> Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I
> >> need
> >> for my servers.
> >>
> >
> > Ah yes, that's a great call-out.  I'm not sure what the plan is there
> > (or
> > if there is one), but to me it seems like the sort of thing a SIG would
> > build.
>
> Brendan, can you clarify the following points?
>

I'll take a stab at it, though I'll note Josh Boyer has already provided a
few answers to similar questions...


> - are you going to keep stable ABI between Stream kernel releases, or
> should we expect each kernel to break 3rd party drivers/modules?
>

All our kernel changes are implemented against the kernel ABI- there is no
point in time during release development when we have interim changes in
the kernel that ignore the symbols in the whitelist.  So basically if your
experience of going from one minor release to another has been smooth, the
incremental kernels between those two releases would also tend to run
smooth, assuming whatever motions happen with the 3rd party drivers/modules
behind the scenes continue to happen (for example, rebuilding from source).


> - what/how many synchronization points are going to be with RHEL
> releases?
>

I'm not sure I'm interpreting your question correctly, could you restate?
I don't want to hit you with detailed process information only to find out
I'm answering the wrong question!


> - what about security updates? Will they be released *before* the
> corresponding RHEL secure patch, or should we expect the (slow) current
> update cadency?
>

RHEL development prioritizes CVE resolution in support streams, followed by
current release update streams.


> - is an upgrade path from Stream-8 to Stream-9 planned, or the usual
> "total server rebuild" will be necessary?
>

Upgrades are important.  We continue to invest in the major release upgrade
tooling introduced with the launch of RHEL 8.

Full disclosure: the main CentOS point was to be 100% compatible, down
> to the specific kernel used, with RHEL. To get that, we lived with: a)
> comparatively few packages, b) not-working yum security-only updates and
> c) very restrictive selinux policies.
>
> I am heavily invested in CentOS/RHEL ecosystem and I opened many bug
> reports/enhancement requests in the past years, so I would really like
> to continue using CentOS. However, using Stream seems to removing the
> key selling point (ie: total RHEL compatibility) without clear benefit.
>

Thanks for the bug reports :-)  I hear you on RHEL compatibility.  With my
OS developer hat on I think CentOS Stream will be more RHEL compatible, but
if I put on my old dusty ops hat I can understand why it might not look
that way right now.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:54 AM Phil Perry  wrote:

> On 10/12/2020 03:55, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> >>> While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
> >>> mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
> >>> drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.
> >>>
> >> So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
> >> third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
> >> Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need
> >> for my servers.
> >
> > Ah yes, that's a great call-out.  I'm not sure what the plan is there (or
> > if there is one), but to me it seems like the sort of thing a SIG would
> > build.
> >
>
> Well, yes, about 10 years too late for those discussions I'm afraid ;-)
>

Yes, but the calculus has changed a bit from 10 years ago, too, no?


> And besides, why on earth would Red Hat remove support for older
> hardware that you (understandably) no longer want to commit resources to
> maintaining, only to turn round and commit resources to maintaining them
> in a SIG? That's why you guys reached out to us (elrepo) in the first
> place.


Note we've moved from me discussing facts about how RHEL works to my
unauthoritative opinions on matters ;-) My point is really only this: if
past decisions no longer make the most sense in the context of new events,
we need to redesign.  To the extent we can make things better we should
make them better.  For this topic it's probably too early to tell if or how
things should change in light of the upcoming changes, but it's clear that
handling it will make CentOS Stream adoption an option for more people who
use CentOS today.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Gionatan Danti]

Il 2020-12-10 04:55 Brendan Conoboy ha scritto:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:


On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
> mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
> drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.
>
So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I 
need

for my servers.



Ah yes, that's a great call-out.  I'm not sure what the plan is there 
(or

if there is one), but to me it seems like the sort of thing a SIG would
build.


Brendan, can you clarify the following points?
- are you going to keep stable ABI between Stream kernel releases, or 
should we expect each kernel to break 3rd party drivers/modules?
- what/how many synchronization points are going to be with RHEL 
releases?
- what about security updates? Will they be released *before* the 
corresponding RHEL secure patch, or should we expect the (slow) current 
update cadency?
- is an upgrade path from Stream-8 to Stream-9 planned, or the usual 
"total server rebuild" will be necessary?


Full disclosure: the main CentOS point was to be 100% compatible, down 
to the specific kernel used, with RHEL. To get that, we lived with: a) 
comparatively few packages, b) not-working yum security-only updates and 
c) very restrictive selinux policies.


I am heavily invested in CentOS/RHEL ecosystem and I opened many bug 
reports/enhancement requests in the past years, so I would really like 
to continue using CentOS. However, using Stream seems to removing the 
key selling point (ie: total RHEL compatibility) without clear benefit.


Thanks.

--
Danti Gionatan
Supporto Tecnico
Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
email: g.da...@assyoma.it - i...@assyoma.it
GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phil Perry]

On 10/12/2020 03:55, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:


On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.


So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need
for my servers.



Ah yes, that's a great call-out.  I'm not sure what the plan is there (or
if there is one), but to me it seems like the sort of thing a SIG would
build.



Well, yes, about 10 years too late for those discussions I'm afraid ;-)

And besides, why on earth would Red Hat remove support for older 
hardware that you (understandably) no longer want to commit resources to 
maintaining, only to turn round and commit resources to maintaining them 
in a SIG? That's why you guys reached out to us (elrepo) in the first place.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:

> On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
> > mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
> > drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.
> >
> So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
> third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
> Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need
> for my servers.
>

Ah yes, that's a great call-out.  I'm not sure what the plan is there (or
if there is one), but to me it seems like the sort of thing a SIG would
build.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Akemi Yagi]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 6:07 PM Lamar Owen  wrote:
>
> On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
> > mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
> > drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.
> >
> So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a
> third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that
> Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need
> for my servers.

And just to give you some more examples -- ELRepo offers DUD (driver
update disk) images for the devices whose support has been dropped in
RHEL 8:

https://elrepo.org/linux/dud/el8/x86_64/

Akemi
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Lamar Owen]

On 12/9/20 12:10 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

While I'm not sure how we'll get there, it seems like the
mutually satisfying end result would be one where third party binary
drivers work with CentOS Stream kernels.  Let's see what we can do.

So, I want to address this part a bit.  In MANY cases, it's not a 
third-party driver that ELrepo packages; it's an in-kernel driver that 
Red Hat has decided to disable.  Such as the megaraid_sas driver I need 
for my servers.



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:24:33AM +, Pete Biggs wrote:
> What will be the incentive for vendors to participate? Sure you can
> talk the corporate talk about opportunities and ecosystems, but the
> bottom line is that it requires investment (at least in time) when they
> could just continue supporting RHEL point releases, or possibly every
> other point release.

Oh, this one is easy. Because *this is how Red Hat is telling vendors to
support RHEL point releases from now on*. I know it's easy to get lost in
everything else, but this is a huge pivot in RHEL development focusing more
directly on CentOS.

(Although as I understand it there will also be cases where code supporting
new hardware is embargoed until a release date, which complicates things in
some cases. That doesn't change the overall new picture though.)

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 7:21 AM Phil Perry  wrote:

> On 09/12/2020 03:26, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Pete Biggs  wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:
> >>
>  "CentOS will become the developer playground"
> >>>
> >>> This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
> >>> playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned*
> >> (with
> >>> emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.
> >>
> >> It's all the talk of SIGs and developing and testing and that Stream
> >> will be the centerpiece of that. That's what I meant.
> >>
> >
> > I don't know if I'd call SIGs a playground, but they're certainly an
> > important venue for communities to explore variations.
> >
> >
> >>> Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in
> secret,
> >> in
> >>> the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched.
> There
> >> may
> >>> be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update
> >> hitting
> >>> CentOS Stream to be very high.
> >>
> >> I don't get that from the documents released today.  If Stream is *not*
> >> a test-bed, then surely the code that appears in Stream must be fully
> >> formed in secret behind the scenes first. Yes, it will appear piecemeal
> >> rather than in one big chunk, but it has been categorically denied that
> >> Stream is not a RHEL 8.n+1 beta and is more a RHEL 8.n+1 RC/rolling
> >> release.
> >>
> >
> > I think maybe some of the nervousness about CentOS Stream comes from RHEL
> > seeming opacity on its development model.  As one of the architects of
> our
> > development process I'd be happy to field questions.  I'll start by
> making
> > a two points in case they're in any way unclear:
> >
> > 1. Everything that goes into RHEL lands upstream first, then the patches
> > are backported into the RHEL releases.
> > 2. Most of the work we do or plan on doing is in bugzilla.redhat.com.
> If
> > you go into the RHEL8 product queue today and file a bug you'll see
> "CentOS
> > Stream" as a "Version" where an issue is encountered.
> >
> > I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
> >> aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
> >> future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
> >> possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
> >> Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
> >> 8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
> >> of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
> >> well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
> >> built in to the kernel.
> >>
> >
> > Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
> > Those are here:
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility
> >
> > For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.
> >
> >
>
> Hi Brendan,
>
> This point is *critical*, so I apologise in advance for the lengthy
> post, *you* are breaking the kernel ABI between RHEL8 and Stream.
>
> One of the main unique selling points of RHEL is the stability of it's
> kernel ABI. No other distro provides this. The very nature of rolling
> kernel updates in Stream breaks the kernel ABI and breaks compatibility
> between RHEL8 and Stream. What works on RHEL8 may not work on Stream. At
> the kernel level, the two products diverge in fundamental compatibility
> and are not compatible, are no longer the same.
>
> How bad is this divergence / breakage? Well, we know the kernel ABI will
> change from time to time, almost exclusively at new point releases due
> to the massive backporting work that goes into the RHEL kernel. And this
> is fine, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan
> for it's impact. It's a price well worth paying.
>
> To put this in context, at elrepo I currently help maintain around 50
> 3rd party kernel driver packages for RHEL8. When RH released RHEL8.3,
> every single package in our repository broke due to changes in the
> kernel ABI in the 6 month period between RHEL8.2 and RHEL8.3. It's not
> ideal, but we accept it as a price we pay for the otherwise excellent
> stability of the kernel ABI during the proceeding 6 months. As I said
> above, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan
> for it.
>
> Now contrast that with Stream. Every kernel update in Stream has the
> potential to break the kernel ABI causing packages built for RHEL to
> break. We don't know when that may happen (only that it will), we don't
> know how often it will happen, we have no idea which packages it will
> break. and we have no way to fix it. Consequently, elrepo has been
> unable to support Stream kernels.
>
> It is not just elrepo's users that the Stream kernels will affect. All
> OEM hardware 

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Barry Brimer]

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020, Louis Lagendijk wrote:


On Wed, 2020-12-09 at 15:13 +, Phil Perry wrote:


If
you are able to retain kernel ABI compatibility between RHEL8 and
Stream
kernels, then we (and other OEMs) will be able to continue to
support
Stream users, otherwise Stream users will have to look to
alternative
solutions.

Phil


Maybe offering 2 kernels in stream may solve your problem? A "latest
point release" and a "rolling version"? I realize that this may cause
issues with packages that really need the new kernel features


Perhaps using the Red Hat compatible kernel (if that's what it's still 
called, I haven't followed any recent naming changes) from Oracle Linux 
could be considered? Not that this isn't messy, but might provide what's 
missing?

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Louis Lagendijk]

On Wed, 2020-12-09 at 15:13 +, Phil Perry wrote:
> 
> If 
> you are able to retain kernel ABI compatibility between RHEL8 and
> Stream 
> kernels, then we (and other OEMs) will be able to continue to
> support 
> Stream users, otherwise Stream users will have to look to
> alternative 
> solutions.
> 
> Phil
> 
Maybe offering 2 kernels in stream may solve your problem? A "latest
point release" and a "rolling version"? I realize that this may cause
issues with packages that really need the new kernel features

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phil Perry]

On 09/12/2020 03:26, Brendan Conoboy wrote:

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Pete Biggs  wrote:


On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:



"CentOS will become the developer playground"


This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned*

(with

emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.


It's all the talk of SIGs and developing and testing and that Stream
will be the centerpiece of that. That's what I meant.



I don't know if I'd call SIGs a playground, but they're certainly an
important venue for communities to explore variations.



Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in secret,

in

the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched. There

may

be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update

hitting

CentOS Stream to be very high.


I don't get that from the documents released today.  If Stream is *not*
a test-bed, then surely the code that appears in Stream must be fully
formed in secret behind the scenes first. Yes, it will appear piecemeal
rather than in one big chunk, but it has been categorically denied that
Stream is not a RHEL 8.n+1 beta and is more a RHEL 8.n+1 RC/rolling
release.



I think maybe some of the nervousness about CentOS Stream comes from RHEL
seeming opacity on its development model.  As one of the architects of our
development process I'd be happy to field questions.  I'll start by making
a two points in case they're in any way unclear:

1. Everything that goes into RHEL lands upstream first, then the patches
are backported into the RHEL releases.
2. Most of the work we do or plan on doing is in bugzilla.redhat.com.  If
you go into the RHEL8 product queue today and file a bug you'll see "CentOS
Stream" as a "Version" where an issue is encountered.

I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release

aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
built in to the kernel.



Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
Those are here: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility

For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.




Hi Brendan,

This point is *critical*, so I apologise in advance for the lengthy 
post, *you* are breaking the kernel ABI between RHEL8 and Stream.


One of the main unique selling points of RHEL is the stability of it's 
kernel ABI. No other distro provides this. The very nature of rolling 
kernel updates in Stream breaks the kernel ABI and breaks compatibility 
between RHEL8 and Stream. What works on RHEL8 may not work on Stream. At 
the kernel level, the two products diverge in fundamental compatibility 
and are not compatible, are no longer the same.


How bad is this divergence / breakage? Well, we know the kernel ABI will 
change from time to time, almost exclusively at new point releases due 
to the massive backporting work that goes into the RHEL kernel. And this 
is fine, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan 
for it's impact. It's a price well worth paying.


To put this in context, at elrepo I currently help maintain around 50 
3rd party kernel driver packages for RHEL8. When RH released RHEL8.3, 
every single package in our repository broke due to changes in the 
kernel ABI in the 6 month period between RHEL8.2 and RHEL8.3. It's not 
ideal, but we accept it as a price we pay for the otherwise excellent 
stability of the kernel ABI during the proceeding 6 months. As I said 
above, we know it's coming, we know when it's coming, and we can plan 
for it.


Now contrast that with Stream. Every kernel update in Stream has the 
potential to break the kernel ABI causing packages built for RHEL to 
break. We don't know when that may happen (only that it will), we don't 
know how often it will happen, we have no idea which packages it will 
break. and we have no way to fix it. Consequently, elrepo has been 
unable to support Stream kernels.


It is not just elrepo's users that the Stream kernels will affect. All 
OEM hardware manufacturers releasing 3rd party driver rpms as part of 
Red Hat's Driver Update Programme or otherwise will be similarly 
affected, and their driver updates will not be applicable to or 
compatible with CentOS Stream. In fact, RHEL's own driver update 
packages will likely need rebuilding against each Stream kernel update, 
although presumably you are in the unique 

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Nikolaos Milas]

On 9/12/2020 4:32 μ.μ., Brendan Conoboy wrote:

As CentOS Stream grows, I expect many companies who sell hardware will
become active members of the community.


Probably, but this is not the point. The value of CentOS is that in 
essence it is identical to RHEL.


This allows its use in multiple scenarios which the new CentOS Stream 
will not be able to support any more, due to its nature.


You may want to read comments at:

https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

and:

https://www.change.org/p/centos-governing-board-do-not-destroy-centos-by-using-it-as-a-rhel-upstream

to realize why this change will make it unsuitable in most of its 
current usage scenarios.


Cheers,
Nick

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:41 AM Pete Biggs  wrote:

> > I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
> > > aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
> > > future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
> > > possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
> > > Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
> > > 8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
> > > of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
> > > well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
> > > built in to the kernel.
> >
> > Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
> > Those are here:
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility
> >
> > For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.
>
> Yes, and many things work well. My most recent issue was that kit
> supplied by HPE (sorry, it's pain is stuck in my mind) had a RAID
> controller that needs a driver disk during install - doing the install
> time drivers is not a problem, the problem is that they don't support
> CentOS, hence I had to use a RHEL driver and out of the 5 available for
> RHEL7/8, only one of them worked with a CentOS release. HPE support
> don't want to know because they don't support CentOS.
>
> I know this comes under the heading of "Corporate RedHat Policy", but
> is RedHat going to do the right thing by CentOS 8 Stream to the level
> of lobbying other behemoth corporations such as HPE or Dell to support
> it?
>

As CentOS Stream grows, I expect many companies who sell hardware will
become active members of the community.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Rainer Traut]

Am 08.12.20 um 22:30 schrieb Frank Cox:

Prior to this point it's been a difference without any difference, but I wonder 
if Oracle actually re-creates RHEL or if they re-create Centos.

Oracle was/is much faster in releasing updates, point releases and releases.
They don't need Centos to get OL going.




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Rainer Traut]

Wrong.

Am 08.12.20 um 18:25 schrieb J Martin Rushton via CentOS:

The first thing Oracle wants is for you to sign up for an Oracle
account.  Hmm, I'll give Springdale a try.  For those with long
memories, remember the DEC RDMS promises prior to take over, and the
aftermath?


Isos are here:
https://yum.oracle.com/oracle-linux-isos.html

Repository is here:
https://yum.oracle.com/oracle-linux-8.html

Already stated by someone else:
Free as CentOS, faster updates than CentOS, and with some extra support,
BTRFS and a newer kernel, for example.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Kai Bojens via CentOS]

Am 08.12.20 um 15:06 schrieb Rich Bowen:
The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next 
year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat 
Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a 
current RHEL release. 


JFTR: I don't have a problem with this change per se. I just don't like 
this "Roma locuta causa finita" attitude and the fact that this happens 
for CentOS 8 right in its lifetime.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Pete Biggs]

> 
> I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
> > aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
> > future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
> > possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
> > Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
> > 8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
> > of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
> > well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
> > built in to the kernel.
> > 
> 
> Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
> Those are here: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility
> 
> For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.

Yes, and many things work well. My most recent issue was that kit
supplied by HPE (sorry, it's pain is stuck in my mind) had a RAID
controller that needs a driver disk during install - doing the install
time drivers is not a problem, the problem is that they don't support
CentOS, hence I had to use a RHEL driver and out of the 5 available for
RHEL7/8, only one of them worked with a CentOS release. HPE support
don't want to know because they don't support CentOS.

I know this comes under the heading of "Corporate RedHat Policy", but
is RedHat going to do the right thing by CentOS 8 Stream to the level
of lobbying other behemoth corporations such as HPE or Dell to support
it?

P.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Pete Biggs]

On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 19:52 -0800, Brendan Conoboy wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:00 PM Pete Biggs  wrote:
> 
> > The problem is that we won't know if it will work.  When CentOS matched
> > the RHEL point releases we knew that an RPM/driver targeted for RHEL
> > 8.2 has a good chance of working on CentOS 8.2 - but that versioning
> > match is lost with Stream. So vendors will either have to produce
> > another version of their RPM for CentOS 8 Stream (and continuously
> > check to see if it needs to be updated) or, more likely, just not
> > bother to support CentOS.  It already happens - HPE won't support
> > CentOS, but they do support RHEL and those RHEL RPMs work with CentOS.
> > The only Linux they support is RHEL, so we're stuck with our HPE kit.
> > 
> 
> Cool, I understand where you're coming from.  If the world remained static
> after this announcement I would be more concerned about this scenario.  As
> it is, we're in a dynamic space, and CentOS Stream will be a place that
> hardware vendors can participate as well.

What will be the incentive for vendors to participate? Sure you can
talk the corporate talk about opportunities and ecosystems, but the
bottom line is that it requires investment (at least in time) when they
could just continue supporting RHEL point releases, or possibly every
other point release.

I understand that the reason HPE, for example, don't support CentOS is
that there is no verification suite to ensure compatibility. Since
CentOS is a different beast to RHEL now, are things like that going to
looked at?

> 
> > But I will absolutely say that the things they are rolling into RHEL 8.4
> > > in a few months are not inherently less stable or less secure or
> > > whatever else you want to call it .. when compared to other Linux
> > distros.
> > 
> > So instead of keeping everything back for a point release, the packages
> > are set free once they are ready. Stream is a rolling release. And
> > that's fine, but it's not what people thought they were getting when
> > committing to CentOS. It has always been promoted as point release
> > compatible with RHEL and that was it's main attraction to many people.
> > 
> 
> It's certainly a change.

Yes, yes it is.  It's a major change in philosophy for the distro. It's
a change that should not have been thrown at the community in such a
way. There are ways of delivering and transitioning; there are such
things as change managers to bring the community along with you.
Working to make this change for CentOS 9 in 2023/4 could have been
delivered without much backlash - I don't think I have seen a single
positive comment about this other than from people directly involved
with RedHat/CentOS. There's politics and corporate managers behind this
somewhere.


P.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Alessandro Baggi]

Il 08/12/20 22:12, Nicolas Kovacs ha scritto:

Le 08/12/2020 à 21:56, Johnny Hughes a écrit :

And, it will likely be sometime mid to late 1st quarter 2021 before
CentOS Stream is in its 'Fully Functional' state with community pull
requests and the RHEL package maintainer doing all the work in CentOS
Stream, etc .  CentOS Linux 8 will still be available and updated until
the end of December 2021.

I've spent the last couple hours reading through various reactions to this
sudden paradigm shift, and they're overwhelmingly negative. Even the brazen
professionals and the hardcore guru admins who have seen it all add a little
"RIP CentOS" to their tweets, blog articles and other publications.

Only last month I held my yearly 101 class about Linux and Open Source at our
local university here in South France. We were talking about enterprise class
Linux - which isn't necessarily commercial Linux - and I remember explaining to
my students the choice of CentOS and the benefits of low-risk updates over an
extended period of ten years.

A colleague of mine - the most proficient admin I personally know - already
decided to move to Oracle Linux. And I'm currently considering it as an option.

Cheers from the sunny South of France,

Niki


Hi Niki,

I'm migrating away from centos since 8 released. The possibility of 
centos drop was enabled since IBM acquired RH. Johnny says that this is 
not an IBM decision, that a RH decision? Then it's worst.


My new ship (that was my old ship) will be debian and Ubuntu.

Thank you Johnny for the hard work.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Alessandro Baggi]

Il 08/12/20 17:04, John Thomas ha scritto:

I'll probably switch to Debian over the new year.


On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 8:01 AM Phelps, Matthew 
wrote:


I'm exactly planning this today.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

Good Morning


> Am 08.12.2020 um 15:06 schrieb Rich Bowen :
> 
> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next year 
> we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat Enterprise 
> Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a current RHEL 
> release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end at the end of 2021. 
> CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as the upstream 
> (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
> 
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux 7, 
> and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of the RHEL 
> 7 life cycle. 
> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
> 
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in collaboration 
> among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This ensures SIGs are 
> developing and testing against what becomes the next version of RHEL. This 
> also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather than having to build and test 
> for two releases. It gives the CentOS contributor community a great deal of 
> influence in the future of RHEL. And it removes confusion around what 
> “CentOS” means in the Linux distribution ecosystem.
> 
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will be to 
> migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS Linux 8, and 
> has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases. If you are using 
> CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are concerned that CentOS 
> Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you to contact Red Hat about 
> options.
> 
> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your 
> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of project 
> focus might affect you.
> 
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this. 
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]
> 


I have a technical question on this regarding the official CentOS docker images 
found at https://hub.docker.com/_/centos 

Will the image tagged centos:8 follow CentOS Stream eventually, and if so, 
starting when?  Or is it already Stream?

Thanks,
mb


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Alexandru Pătrănescu]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020, 22:58 Johnny Hughes  wrote:

> On 12/8/20 1:04 PM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, Rich Bowen wrote:
> >
> >> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next
> >> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat
> >> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of
> >> a current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will
> >> end at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date,
> >> serving as the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise
> Linux.
> >
> > I suppose I understand the negative feedback -- CentOS 8.x will no
> > longer be a rebuild of RHEL 8.x but will instead be some version of RHEL
> > 8.(x + 1) -- but I'm much more interested in empirical results than in
> > suppositions. I've taken a couple test VMs and set them to CentOS 8
> > Stream and will keep an eye on them. They will either prove stable or
> > not, but (observation > guessing) in my book.
> >
> > If history is any guide, they will prove very stable. If not, then I'll
> > pour one out for CentOS and look elsewhere.
> >
>
> Which is the approach I recommend everyone take.
>
> And, it will likely be sometime mid to late 1st quarter 2021 before
> CentOS Stream is in its 'Fully Functional' state with community pull
> requests and the RHEL package maintainer doing all the work in CentOS
> Stream, etc .  CentOS Linux 8 will still be available and updated until
> the end of December 2021.
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Hey,

In my view, I think CentOS Linux 8 should be kept along with CentOS Stream
8.

Their purpose is different and I can't see why they cannot coexist.

There are production environments where even CentOS Linux 7 repositories
are intentionally delayed with an extra month for non-security minor
changes, just to be sure things are as stable as possible.
I cannot see that moving from CentOS Linux 8 to CentOS Stream 8.

But there are of course cases where users would want to move.

If the two distributions would coexist, over the years, you will understand
the need for users moving or not and act accordingly, in the interest of
the community.

So far, it looks like it will just backfire even for cases that could
actually be quite prone to moving.

Regards,
Alex
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:00 PM Pete Biggs  wrote:

> The problem is that we won't know if it will work.  When CentOS matched
> the RHEL point releases we knew that an RPM/driver targeted for RHEL
> 8.2 has a good chance of working on CentOS 8.2 - but that versioning
> match is lost with Stream. So vendors will either have to produce
> another version of their RPM for CentOS 8 Stream (and continuously
> check to see if it needs to be updated) or, more likely, just not
> bother to support CentOS.  It already happens - HPE won't support
> CentOS, but they do support RHEL and those RHEL RPMs work with CentOS.
> The only Linux they support is RHEL, so we're stuck with our HPE kit.
>

Cool, I understand where you're coming from.  If the world remained static
after this announcement I would be more concerned about this scenario.  As
it is, we're in a dynamic space, and CentOS Stream will be a place that
hardware vendors can participate as well.

> But I will absolutely say that the things they are rolling into RHEL 8.4
> > in a few months are not inherently less stable or less secure or
> > whatever else you want to call it .. when compared to other Linux
> distros.
>
> So instead of keeping everything back for a point release, the packages
> are set free once they are ready. Stream is a rolling release. And
> that's fine, but it's not what people thought they were getting when
> committing to CentOS. It has always been promoted as point release
> compatible with RHEL and that was it's main attraction to many people.
>

It's certainly a change.


> A separate question. Will a point release of RHEL 8.x be directly a
> snapshot of 8Stream on a specific date? Or will RedHat pick and choose
> which versions from 8Stream they put into 8.x? i.e. Would it be
> possible to clone the 8Stream tree on the date that, say, 8.6 is
> released and call it 8.6.stream - would 8.6 be the same as 8.6.stream
>

RHEL is developed according to a schedule that keeps us delivering minor
releases on a 6 month cadence.  That includes a period of time when we're
putting the finishing touches on one release and simultaneously working on
the next.  Folks on the CentOS Stream team can speak with more authority on
what the intended alignment points are (I know what makes sense from my
perspective, but there may be other considerations I'm unaware of).

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Brendan Conoboy]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:19 PM Pete Biggs  wrote:

> On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:
>
> > > "CentOS will become the developer playground"
> >
> > This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
> > playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned*
> (with
> > emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.
>
> It's all the talk of SIGs and developing and testing and that Stream
> will be the centerpiece of that. That's what I meant.
>

I don't know if I'd call SIGs a playground, but they're certainly an
important venue for communities to explore variations.


> > Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in secret,
> in
> > the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched. There
> may
> > be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update
> hitting
> > CentOS Stream to be very high.
>
> I don't get that from the documents released today.  If Stream is *not*
> a test-bed, then surely the code that appears in Stream must be fully
> formed in secret behind the scenes first. Yes, it will appear piecemeal
> rather than in one big chunk, but it has been categorically denied that
> Stream is not a RHEL 8.n+1 beta and is more a RHEL 8.n+1 RC/rolling
> release.
>

I think maybe some of the nervousness about CentOS Stream comes from RHEL
seeming opacity on its development model.  As one of the architects of our
development process I'd be happy to field questions.  I'll start by making
a two points in case they're in any way unclear:

1. Everything that goes into RHEL lands upstream first, then the patches
are backported into the RHEL releases.
2. Most of the work we do or plan on doing is in bugzilla.redhat.com.  If
you go into the RHEL8 product queue today and file a bug you'll see "CentOS
Stream" as a "Version" where an issue is encountered.

I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
> aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
> future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
> possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
> Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
> 8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
> of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
> well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
> built in to the kernel.
>

Generally if they follow the ABI guidelines I would expect it to work.
Those are here: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-compatibility

For loadable kernel modules there's a kernel ABI.


> I suspect that for a large proportion of scenarios Streams will be
> perfectly OK. But we still get software/instruments that specifically
> say "only RHEL 7.4" or something like that (yes, it's a support
> nightmare).


It's regrettable when an ISV gets fixated on minor release versions and
won't recognize forward compatibility.  This is generally more of a matter
of policy rooted in legacy than a technical limitation.

-- 
Brendan Conoboy / Linux Project Lead / Red Hat, Inc.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Pete Biggs]

> 

> It is not the same as Rawhide is all I am saying.
> 
> It is based on the current release and it is being modified for some reason.
> 
> That modification can be a bugfix from a reported bug, it can be an
> enhancement for a given package or it can be a security update.
> 
> Each of these updates will be rolled in one at a time.
> 
> It is what will eventually become the next rhel source code in a few
> months for the next point release.
> 
> Only you will know if this will work for your situation.

The problem is that we won't know if it will work.  When CentOS matched
the RHEL point releases we knew that an RPM/driver targeted for RHEL
8.2 has a good chance of working on CentOS 8.2 - but that versioning
match is lost with Stream. So vendors will either have to produce
another version of their RPM for CentOS 8 Stream (and continuously
check to see if it needs to be updated) or, more likely, just not
bother to support CentOS.  It already happens - HPE won't support
CentOS, but they do support RHEL and those RHEL RPMs work with CentOS.
The only Linux they support is RHEL, so we're stuck with our HPE kit. 

> 
> But I will absolutely say that the things they are rolling into RHEL 8.4
> in a few months are not inherently less stable or less secure or
> whatever else you want to call it .. when compared to other Linux distros.

So instead of keeping everything back for a point release, the packages
are set free once they are ready. Stream is a rolling release. And
that's fine, but it's not what people thought they were getting when
committing to CentOS. It has always been promoted as point release
compatible with RHEL and that was it's main attraction to many people.

A separate question. Will a point release of RHEL 8.x be directly a
snapshot of 8Stream on a specific date? Or will RedHat pick and choose
which versions from 8Stream they put into 8.x? i.e. Would it be
possible to clone the 8Stream tree on the date that, say, 8.6 is
released and call it 8.6.stream - would 8.6 be the same as 8.6.stream?


P.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 7:32 PM Johnny Hughes  wrote:

> On 12/8/20 5:29 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:05 PM Johnny Hughes  wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/8/20 3:40 PM, Jim Bourne wrote:
> >>> On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>  I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do with
>  this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat
> still
>  has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship
> with
>  many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.
> >>>
> >>> Then WHO made the decision?
> >>>
> >>> Where was the transparency in this decision by the CentOS Board?
> >>> (assuming CentOS still *has* a working independent board)
> >>>
> >>> Judging from the reactions, I don't believe that anyone saw this
> coming.
> >>> Where was the community consultation on IF this was a good idea.
> >>
> >> The CentOS Project board has a Red Hat Liaison.  That position is
> >> documented here:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/board-responsibilities/#red-hat-liaison-responsibilities
> >>
> >> Also see role of Liaison here (and look at B:):
> >>
> >> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/voting/
> >>
> >> The bottom line is .. a decision of the CentOS Board has been made and
> >> we don't have to like it.  We do have to do it, regardless of if we like
> >> it.
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> CentOS mailing list
> >> CentOS@centos.org
> >> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > B. The Liaison may, in exceptional circumstances, make a decision on
> behalf
> > of the Board if a consensus has not been reached on an issue that is
> deemed
> > time or business critical by Red Hat.
> >
> >
> >
> > So, Johnny, are you saying that the RedHat Liaison, who is Brian
> Exelbierd (
> > bexel...@redhat.com) has forced this decision on the CentOS Board,
> despite
> > objection from the Board?
> >
> > Brian, please answer this directly, or the so called "Transparency" from
> > RedHat and CentOS we were promised will be clearly shown to be a lie.
> >
> >
>
> No .. I am saying that the CentOS Board knows that option exists, and
> therefore we know that IF it is invoked, we get no say in what will
> happen for that decision.  I am saying that the CentOS Board therefore
> made a hard decision given the situation we were in.
>
>
Then I go back to my previous message, the Board failed to properly engage,
and represent the Project's users.

Sorry, but basically saying you caved to RedHat's pressure is worse to me
than if you forced them to invoke this option.

It's clear from our reaction here, and *everywhere else* that this decision
is *not* in the best interest of CentOS's users.

You might as well all resign from this Board, since it is a puppet
organization. Which is directly the opposite of what we were told would be
the case.

Again, back to the Trust issue. We have none now.

-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/8/20 6:18 PM, Pete Biggs wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:
> 
>>> "CentOS will become the developer playground"
>>
>> This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
>> playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned* (with
>> emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.
> 
> It's all the talk of SIGs and developing and testing and that Stream
> will be the centerpiece of that. That's what I meant. 
> 
>>
>> Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in secret, in
>> the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched. There may
>> be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update hitting
>> CentOS Stream to be very high.
> 
> I don't get that from the documents released today.  If Stream is *not*
> a test-bed, then surely the code that appears in Stream must be fully
> formed in secret behind the scenes first. Yes, it will appear piecemeal
> rather than in one big chunk, but it has been categorically denied that
> Stream is not a RHEL 8.n+1 beta and is more a RHEL 8.n+1 RC/rolling
> release. 
> 
> 
> I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
> aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
> future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
> possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
> Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
> 8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
> of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
> well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
> built in to the kernel.
> 
> I suspect that for a large proportion of scenarios Streams will be
> perfectly OK. But we still get software/instruments that specifically
> say "only RHEL 7.4" or something like that (yes, it's a support
> nightmare).  
> 

It is not the same as Rawhide is all I am saying.

It is based on the current release and it is being modified for some reason.

That modification can be a bugfix from a reported bug, it can be an
enhancement for a given package or it can be a security update.

Each of these updates will be rolled in one at a time.

It is what will eventually become the next rhel source code in a few
months for the next point release.

Only you will know if this will work for your situation.

We do have CI testing, which will be beefed up to be similar to the
testing RHEL actually does right now before release of packages for the
'released version' of RHEL.

Will bugs get though .. sure, they do now into RHEL.

But I will absolutely say that the things they are rolling into RHEL 8.4
in a few months are not inherently less stable or less secure or
whatever else you want to call it .. when compared to other Linux distros.

The process that Debian would use to roll in bug fixes or Ubuntu would
use to roll in bug fixes would not be significantly better or more
stable or more secure.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/8/20 5:29 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:05 PM Johnny Hughes  wrote:
> 
>> On 12/8/20 3:40 PM, Jim Bourne wrote:
>>> On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
 I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do with
 this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat still
 has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship with
 many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.
>>>
>>> Then WHO made the decision?
>>>
>>> Where was the transparency in this decision by the CentOS Board?
>>> (assuming CentOS still *has* a working independent board)
>>>
>>> Judging from the reactions, I don't believe that anyone saw this coming.
>>> Where was the community consultation on IF this was a good idea.
>>
>> The CentOS Project board has a Red Hat Liaison.  That position is
>> documented here:
>>
>>
>> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/board-responsibilities/#red-hat-liaison-responsibilities
>>
>> Also see role of Liaison here (and look at B:):
>>
>> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/voting/
>>
>> The bottom line is .. a decision of the CentOS Board has been made and
>> we don't have to like it.  We do have to do it, regardless of if we like
>> it.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>
> 
> 
> 
> B. The Liaison may, in exceptional circumstances, make a decision on behalf
> of the Board if a consensus has not been reached on an issue that is deemed
> time or business critical by Red Hat.
> 
> 
> 
> So, Johnny, are you saying that the RedHat Liaison, who is Brian Exelbierd (
> bexel...@redhat.com) has forced this decision on the CentOS Board, despite
> objection from the Board?
> 
> Brian, please answer this directly, or the so called "Transparency" from
> RedHat and CentOS we were promised will be clearly shown to be a lie.
> 
> 

No .. I am saying that the CentOS Board knows that option exists, and
therefore we know that IF it is invoked, we get no say in what will
happen for that decision.  I am saying that the CentOS Board therefore
made a hard decision given the situation we were in.




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Pete Biggs]

On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 17:54 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:

> > "CentOS will become the developer playground"
> 
> This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
> playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned* (with
> emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.

It's all the talk of SIGs and developing and testing and that Stream
will be the centerpiece of that. That's what I meant. 

> 
> Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in secret, in
> the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched. There may
> be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update hitting
> CentOS Stream to be very high.

I don't get that from the documents released today.  If Stream is *not*
a test-bed, then surely the code that appears in Stream must be fully
formed in secret behind the scenes first. Yes, it will appear piecemeal
rather than in one big chunk, but it has been categorically denied that
Stream is not a RHEL 8.n+1 beta and is more a RHEL 8.n+1 RC/rolling
release. 


I think what a lot of people are concerned about is the rolling-release
aspect of this. There will be no definitive versioning of CentOS in the
future - all you will be able to say is "fully updated" and it won't be
possible to slot a CentOS system in to exactly match a RHEL version.
Will third party RPMs built against RHEL 8.x be installable on a CentOS
8 Stream system? The answer is surely "it depends", but there are a lot
of hardware vendors that target drivers to RHEL releases, which may
well make CentOS non-viable for hardware that doesn't have drivers
built in to the kernel.

I suspect that for a large proportion of scenarios Streams will be
perfectly OK. But we still get software/instruments that specifically
say "only RHEL 7.4" or something like that (yes, it's a support
nightmare).  

P.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Richard G]

For the record, I don't think this is a good decision because it
changes what CentOS is (its "core mission" in business-speak).

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 2:07 PM Rich Bowen  wrote:
>
> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next
> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a
> current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end
> at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as
> the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
>
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux
> 7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of
> the RHEL 7 life cycle.
> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
>
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in
> collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This
> ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the next
> version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather
> than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS
> contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of RHEL.
> And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux
> distribution ecosystem.
>
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will
> be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS
> Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases.
> If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are
> concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you
> to contact Red Hat about options.
>
> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your
> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of
> project focus might affect you.
>
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this.
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 11:42:01PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:
> I too would be interested to know what happens to CentOS 8 Stream once
> focus of RedHat moves to RHEL 9?  The life cycle document says the last
> release of RHEL8 will be 8.10, that's a five year road map (since point
> releases seem to be every 6 months), so the point releases will end in
> 2024, presumably the end of the point releases means the end of Stream
> updates?  Have these things been thought out that far ahead?

As I understand it, the current plan is for there to be Stream 8 and Stream
9 in parallel. For one thing, once RH developers are all geared up for
working in Stream 8, it'd be _extra_ work to pull that all back in-house.

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Pete Biggs]

> 
> FAQ:"Updates for the CentOS Stream 8 distribution continue through the 
> full RHEL support phase."
> 
> What does this "full" exactly means? Will C8S be "closed" in May 31,
> 2024 [*] but RHEL8 still supported through Maintenance support mode 
> until 2029?

I too would be interested to know what happens to CentOS 8 Stream once
focus of RedHat moves to RHEL 9?  The life cycle document says the last
release of RHEL8 will be 8.10, that's a five year road map (since point
releases seem to be every 6 months), so the point releases will end in
2024, presumably the end of the point releases means the end of Stream
updates?  Have these things been thought out that far ahead?


P.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:05 PM Johnny Hughes  wrote:

> On 12/8/20 3:40 PM, Jim Bourne wrote:
> > On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >> I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do with
> >> this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat still
> >> has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship with
> >> many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.
> >
> > Then WHO made the decision?
> >
> > Where was the transparency in this decision by the CentOS Board?
> > (assuming CentOS still *has* a working independent board)
> >
> > Judging from the reactions, I don't believe that anyone saw this coming.
> > Where was the community consultation on IF this was a good idea.
>
> The CentOS Project board has a Red Hat Liaison.  That position is
> documented here:
>
>
> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/board-responsibilities/#red-hat-liaison-responsibilities
>
> Also see role of Liaison here (and look at B:):
>
> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/voting/
>
> The bottom line is .. a decision of the CentOS Board has been made and
> we don't have to like it.  We do have to do it, regardless of if we like
> it.
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>



B. The Liaison may, in exceptional circumstances, make a decision on behalf
of the Board if a consensus has not been reached on an issue that is deemed
time or business critical by Red Hat.



So, Johnny, are you saying that the RedHat Liaison, who is Brian Exelbierd (
bexel...@redhat.com) has forced this decision on the CentOS Board, despite
objection from the Board?

Brian, please answer this directly, or the so called "Transparency" from
RedHat and CentOS we were promised will be clearly shown to be a lie.


-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:05 PM Johnny Hughes  wrote:

> On 12/8/20 3:40 PM, Jim Bourne wrote:
> > On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >> I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do with
> >> this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat still
> >> has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship with
> >> many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.
> >
> > Then WHO made the decision?
> >
> > Where was the transparency in this decision by the CentOS Board?
> > (assuming CentOS still *has* a working independent board)
> >
> > Judging from the reactions, I don't believe that anyone saw this coming.
> > Where was the community consultation on IF this was a good idea.
>
> The CentOS Project board has a Red Hat Liaison.  That position is
> documented here:
>
>
> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/board-responsibilities/#red-hat-liaison-responsibilities
>
> Also see role of Liaison here (and look at B:):
>
> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/voting/
>
> The bottom line is .. a decision of the CentOS Board has been made and
> we don't have to like it.  We do have to do it, regardless of if we like
> it.
>

The CentOS Board has failed in its *FIRST* four responsibilities.

>From that first web page:


CentOS Governing Board Responsibilities

   - Guidance and leadership over the ultimate Project roadmap.
   - Community outreach.
   - Maintenance of health and viability of CentOS community.
   - Maintenance of a healthy and proactive relationship with the Project
   users and consider those needs and uses in decisions.



-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

Forget about IBM.

We were told way back in 2014, when Red Hat bought CentOS, that CentOS
would remain independent from RedHat. This is clearly bullshit now. So we
were totally misled into adopting the platform with the belief that what we
were getting would stay the same, an unsupported recompile of RHEL and its
updates.

This is no longer what we will be getting, and even worse, it is no longer
what we will be getting AFTER BEING ASSURED that CentOS 8 would remain in
parallel with RHEL 8 until 2029.

This is a classic bait-and-switch money grab and it is going to hurt *a
lot* of people in the form of a shitload of added work to change platforms.

It's totally contemptible and a complete betrayal to loyal enthusiasts.

I have ZERO respect for RedHat now, and unless the decision is reversed,
I'll prosthelytize against them as loud as I can, on as many platforms as I
can.

I . Am. PISSED.

-Matt

P.S. Where is Karanbir? He is supposedly the Chair of the CentOS Board. I
want to hear from him on this.







On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 5:54 PM Matthew Miller  wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:
> > Forgive a bit of cynicism ...
>
> Sure, some cynicism is absolutely warranted. It's a big change.
>
>
> > "If you want to keep using RHEL for free, you will have to put up with
> > making sure that our paying customers get better quality releases"
>
> I mean That's not the _worst_ deal I've ever heard. But actually it's
> better than you've stated, because the benefit to others happens even
> regardless of the paying customers -- others using CentOS Stream also
> benefit. And for that matter since many of fixes go upstream, users of open
> source in general.
>
> (In some ways, this is like: being a paying customer of RHEL also benefits
> other paying customers. And for that matter, those paying customers benefit
> all of the free users, and Fedora, and hundreds of upstreams.)
>
>
> > "CentOS will become the developer playground"
>
> This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
> playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned* (with
> emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.
>
> Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in secret, in
> the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched. There
> may
> be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update hitting
> CentOS Stream to be very high.
>
>
> > >
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux
> ]
> > Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to make
> > sure it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any resources
> > into it"
>
> Of course, that link says nothing of the sort. It's easy to imagine IBM
> conspiracies, but the honest truth is that there's nothing to that. Now, I
> don't know everything, and it may be the case that IBM is secretly
> pulling all sorts of invisible strings and making Red Hat management dance,
> but I do know about *this* particular thing and IBM had nothing to do with
> it.
>
>
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> 
> Fedora Project Leader
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/8/20 3:40 PM, Jim Bourne wrote:
> On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do with
>> this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat still
>> has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship with
>> many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.
> 
> Then WHO made the decision?
> 
> Where was the transparency in this decision by the CentOS Board?
> (assuming CentOS still *has* a working independent board)
> 
> Judging from the reactions, I don't believe that anyone saw this coming.
> Where was the community consultation on IF this was a good idea.

The CentOS Project board has a Red Hat Liaison.  That position is
documented here:

https://www.centos.org/about/governance/board-responsibilities/#red-hat-liaison-responsibilities

Also see role of Liaison here (and look at B:):

https://www.centos.org/about/governance/voting/

The bottom line is .. a decision of the CentOS Board has been made and
we don't have to like it.  We do have to do it, regardless of if we like it.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 03:15:17PM +, Pete Biggs wrote:
> Forgive a bit of cynicism ...

Sure, some cynicism is absolutely warranted. It's a big change.


> "If you want to keep using RHEL for free, you will have to put up with
> making sure that our paying customers get better quality releases"

I mean That's not the _worst_ deal I've ever heard. But actually it's
better than you've stated, because the benefit to others happens even
regardless of the paying customers -- others using CentOS Stream also
benefit. And for that matter since many of fixes go upstream, users of open
source in general.

(In some ways, this is like: being a paying customer of RHEL also benefits
other paying customers. And for that matter, those paying customers benefit
all of the free users, and Fedora, and hundreds of upstreams.)


> "CentOS will become the developer playground"

This one is categorically not the case. Even Fedora isn't a developer
playground. Everything landing in CentOS Stream is actually *planned* (with
emphasis intentional) to go in a future RHEL release.

Previously, all the development around RHEL releases was done in secret, in
the Red Hat black box. Now it's out of the box and can be watched. There may
be some launch pains, but I expect the average quality of an update hitting
CentOS Stream to be very high.


> > https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]
> Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to make
> sure it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any resources
> into it"

Of course, that link says nothing of the sort. It's easy to imagine IBM
conspiracies, but the honest truth is that there's nothing to that. Now, I
don't know everything, and it may be the case that IBM is secretly
pulling all sorts of invisible strings and making Red Hat management dance,
but I do know about *this* particular thing and IBM had nothing to do with
it.



-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:13 PM Phelps, Matthew 
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:02 PM Johnny Hughes  wrote:
>
>> On 12/8/20 2:01 PM, cen...@niob.at wrote:
>> > On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> >> On 12/8/20 8:35 AM, Bill Gee wrote:
>> >>> Aside from the the latest shiny - what are the advantages of CentOS 8
>> >>> Stream?  What are the benefits?
>> >>>
>> >>> I read through the announcement and FAQ, but they do not address that
>> >>> question.  Is it just a name change?  Is it an attempt to put CentOS
>> >>> on a subscription model?
>> >>>
>> >> Stream is the RHEL sorce code for rhel + 0.1 .. so durng the 8.3 rhel
>> >> cycle, stream will be rhel 8.4 source code.
>> >>
>> >> It is not very far ahead of the current code.  It is indeed the code
>> you
>> >> will get in 6 months.  It is not 'new shiny' .. it is newer enterprise.
>> >>
>> >> What are the benefits:
>> >>
>> >> 1)  Many people (like Intel and Facebook) are providing feedback in
>> real
>> >> time.  So can any user.  They should have in place, before RHEL 9
>> >> development starts, the ability to accept public community pull
>> requests
>> >> into stream.
>> >>
>> >> 2)  This code is still RHEL source code .. it is just not released in
>> >> rhel yet.  Almost all of it will be released in the upcoming RHEL point
>> >> release.
>> >>
>> >> 3)  Most bugs will get fixed faster, if the code is pulled into stream.
>> >>   Many times you don't get the fix until the next point release .. and
>> >> this will be what stream is.
>> >
>> > You are putting lipstick on a pig. Let's face it: This is IBM pulling
>> > the plug on CentOS.
>> >
>> > Not a single one of those "benefits" will benefit *me*. I am a private
>> > user hosting his own machines with CentOS for stability but using RHEL
>> > for work. I do not have the money to pay for RHEL. But I do contribute
>> > to open-source projects, some of which are part of RHEL.
>> >
>> > I'm pretty sure IBM is behind this: They still do not like the
>> > open-source model. They only like money.
>> >
>> > After 20 years of running and advocating for Redhat based Distros
>> > (Fedora on workstations, CentOS on servers) I night have to jump ship
>> > (if somebody is going to clone "classic" CentOS to keep tracing RHEL I
>> > might reconsider). Debian or Ubuntu: here I come. I will also no longer
>> > advocate for RHEL in the workplace where we used CentOS for
>> > non-production machines and RHEL for production.
>> >
>> > Thanks for the hard work you put into CentOS over the years. Sorry to
>> > hear that it now turns out to have been wasted.
>> >
>>
>> I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do with
>> this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat still
>> has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship with
>> many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.
>>
>
>
> But, was this a RedHat decision? In other words, was the CentOS Board
> influenced by RedHat to make this decision in an effort to generate more
> revenue by forcing users to switch to a RHEL paid subscription to keep the
> status quo?
>
> If so, I assure them, based on all the feedback I've seen so far, this
> decision will backfire.
>
>
>
No answer?

Not surprised.

So much for CentOS being independant of RedHat.

-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[michael Schumacher]

> A colleague of mine - the most proficient admin I personally know - already
> decided to move to Oracle Linux. And I'm currently considering it as an 
> option.

And Larry Ellison is sitting in his office laughing his ass off. Happy guy with 
a nice christmas gift from the RH board of directors.


-- 
Michael Schumacher

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[DHilsbos]

Paul;

How do you intend to test, and measure stability?

I'm not trying to be contrary, or facetious, I'm looking to learn something in 
this situation.

Thank you,

Dominic L. Hilsbos, MBA 
Director – Information Technology 
Perform Air International Inc.
dhils...@performair.com 
www.PerformAir.com


-Original Message-
From: CentOS [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Paul Heinlein
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 12:05 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, Rich Bowen wrote:

> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next year 
> we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat Enterprise 
> Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a current RHEL 
> release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end at the end of 2021. 
> CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as the upstream 
> (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

I suppose I understand the negative feedback -- CentOS 8.x will no 
longer be a rebuild of RHEL 8.x but will instead be some version of 
RHEL 8.(x + 1) -- but I'm much more interested in empirical results 
than in suppositions. I've taken a couple test VMs and set them to 
CentOS 8 Stream and will keep an eye on them. They will either prove 
stable or not, but (observation > guessing) in my book.

If history is any guide, they will prove very stable. If not, then 
I'll pour one out for CentOS and look elsewhere.

-- 
Paul Heinlein
heinl...@madboa.com
45°38' N, 122°6' W
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Jim Bourne]

On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:

I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do with
this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat still
has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship with
many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.


Then WHO made the decision?

Where was the transparency in this decision by the CentOS Board? 
(assuming CentOS still *has* a working independent board)


Judging from the reactions, I don't believe that anyone saw this coming. 
Where was the community consultation on IF this was a good idea.


Jim


--

Jim Bourne/Dev Null - President Chinook City Roller Derby League
 CCRD  2011  -  2020  BOD  Member,  2016  MRDWC  Hosting  Chair
Co-Captain Glenmore Reservoir Dogs - Flat TrackFever 2012 - 2020
--
"All you need's  an occasional kick in  the philosophy." Frank Herbert

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Leon Fauster via CentOS]

Am 08.12.20 um 21:56 schrieb Johnny Hughes:

On 12/8/20 1:04 PM, Paul Heinlein wrote:

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, Rich Bowen wrote:


The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next
year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat
Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of
a current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will
end at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date,
serving as the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.


I suppose I understand the negative feedback -- CentOS 8.x will no
longer be a rebuild of RHEL 8.x but will instead be some version of RHEL
8.(x + 1) -- but I'm much more interested in empirical results than in
suppositions. I've taken a couple test VMs and set them to CentOS 8
Stream and will keep an eye on them. They will either prove stable or
not, but (observation > guessing) in my book.

If history is any guide, they will prove very stable. If not, then I'll
pour one out for CentOS and look elsewhere.



Which is the approach I recommend everyone take.

And, it will likely be sometime mid to late 1st quarter 2021 before
CentOS Stream is in its 'Fully Functional' state with community pull
requests and the RHEL package maintainer doing all the work in CentOS
Stream, etc .  CentOS Linux 8 will still be available and updated until
the end of December 2021.



FAQ:"Updates for the CentOS Stream 8 distribution continue through the 
full RHEL support phase."


What does this "full" exactly means? Will C8S be "closed" in May 31,
2024 [*] but RHEL8 still supported through Maintenance support mode 
until 2029?


* https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates


--
Leon


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Frank Cox]

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 22:12:50 +0100
Nicolas Kovacs wrote:

> A colleague of mine - the most proficient admin I personally know - already
> decided to move to Oracle Linux. And I'm currently considering it as an
> option.

This sounds like a reasonable path forward, but I wonder if Oracle will simply 
follow Centos into the same "stream" thing.

Prior to this point it's been a difference without any difference, but I wonder 
if Oracle actually re-creates RHEL or if they re-create Centos.

-- 
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Real D 3D Digital Cinema ~ www.melvilletheatre.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:02 PM Johnny Hughes  wrote:

> On 12/8/20 2:01 PM, cen...@niob.at wrote:
> > On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
> >> On 12/8/20 8:35 AM, Bill Gee wrote:
> >>> Aside from the the latest shiny - what are the advantages of CentOS 8
> >>> Stream?  What are the benefits?
> >>>
> >>> I read through the announcement and FAQ, but they do not address that
> >>> question.  Is it just a name change?  Is it an attempt to put CentOS
> >>> on a subscription model?
> >>>
> >> Stream is the RHEL sorce code for rhel + 0.1 .. so durng the 8.3 rhel
> >> cycle, stream will be rhel 8.4 source code.
> >>
> >> It is not very far ahead of the current code.  It is indeed the code you
> >> will get in 6 months.  It is not 'new shiny' .. it is newer enterprise.
> >>
> >> What are the benefits:
> >>
> >> 1)  Many people (like Intel and Facebook) are providing feedback in real
> >> time.  So can any user.  They should have in place, before RHEL 9
> >> development starts, the ability to accept public community pull requests
> >> into stream.
> >>
> >> 2)  This code is still RHEL source code .. it is just not released in
> >> rhel yet.  Almost all of it will be released in the upcoming RHEL point
> >> release.
> >>
> >> 3)  Most bugs will get fixed faster, if the code is pulled into stream.
> >>   Many times you don't get the fix until the next point release .. and
> >> this will be what stream is.
> >
> > You are putting lipstick on a pig. Let's face it: This is IBM pulling
> > the plug on CentOS.
> >
> > Not a single one of those "benefits" will benefit *me*. I am a private
> > user hosting his own machines with CentOS for stability but using RHEL
> > for work. I do not have the money to pay for RHEL. But I do contribute
> > to open-source projects, some of which are part of RHEL.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure IBM is behind this: They still do not like the
> > open-source model. They only like money.
> >
> > After 20 years of running and advocating for Redhat based Distros
> > (Fedora on workstations, CentOS on servers) I night have to jump ship
> > (if somebody is going to clone "classic" CentOS to keep tracing RHEL I
> > might reconsider). Debian or Ubuntu: here I come. I will also no longer
> > advocate for RHEL in the workplace where we used CentOS for
> > non-production machines and RHEL for production.
> >
> > Thanks for the hard work you put into CentOS over the years. Sorry to
> > hear that it now turns out to have been wasted.
> >
>
> I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do with
> this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat still
> has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship with
> many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.
>


But, was this a RedHat decision? In other words, was the CentOS Board
influenced by RedHat to make this decision in an effort to generate more
revenue by forcing users to switch to a RHEL paid subscription to keep the
status quo?

If so, I assure them, based on all the feedback I've seen so far, this
decision will backfire.


-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Le 08/12/2020 à 21:56, Johnny Hughes a écrit :
> And, it will likely be sometime mid to late 1st quarter 2021 before
> CentOS Stream is in its 'Fully Functional' state with community pull
> requests and the RHEL package maintainer doing all the work in CentOS
> Stream, etc .  CentOS Linux 8 will still be available and updated until
> the end of December 2021.

I've spent the last couple hours reading through various reactions to this
sudden paradigm shift, and they're overwhelmingly negative. Even the brazen
professionals and the hardcore guru admins who have seen it all add a little
"RIP CentOS" to their tweets, blog articles and other publications.

Only last month I held my yearly 101 class about Linux and Open Source at our
local university here in South France. We were talking about enterprise class
Linux - which isn't necessarily commercial Linux - and I remember explaining to
my students the choice of CentOS and the benefits of low-risk updates over an
extended period of ten years.

A colleague of mine - the most proficient admin I personally know - already
decided to move to Oracle Linux. And I'm currently considering it as an option.

Cheers from the sunny South of France,

Niki

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Site : https://www.microlinux.fr
Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Strahil Nikolov via CentOS]

> I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do
> with
> this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat
> still
> has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship
> with
> many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.
> 
So why is the hurry ? Why this was not done when the EL8 came alive ?

Best Regards,
Strahil Nikolov

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/8/20 2:01 PM, cen...@niob.at wrote:
> On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>> On 12/8/20 8:35 AM, Bill Gee wrote:
>>> Aside from the the latest shiny - what are the advantages of CentOS 8
>>> Stream?  What are the benefits?
>>>
>>> I read through the announcement and FAQ, but they do not address that
>>> question.  Is it just a name change?  Is it an attempt to put CentOS
>>> on a subscription model?
>>>
>> Stream is the RHEL sorce code for rhel + 0.1 .. so durng the 8.3 rhel
>> cycle, stream will be rhel 8.4 source code.
>>
>> It is not very far ahead of the current code.  It is indeed the code you
>> will get in 6 months.  It is not 'new shiny' .. it is newer enterprise.
>>
>> What are the benefits:
>>
>> 1)  Many people (like Intel and Facebook) are providing feedback in real
>> time.  So can any user.  They should have in place, before RHEL 9
>> development starts, the ability to accept public community pull requests
>> into stream.
>>
>> 2)  This code is still RHEL source code .. it is just not released in
>> rhel yet.  Almost all of it will be released in the upcoming RHEL point
>> release.
>>
>> 3)  Most bugs will get fixed faster, if the code is pulled into stream.
>>   Many times you don't get the fix until the next point release .. and
>> this will be what stream is.
> 
> You are putting lipstick on a pig. Let's face it: This is IBM pulling
> the plug on CentOS.
> 
> Not a single one of those "benefits" will benefit *me*. I am a private
> user hosting his own machines with CentOS for stability but using RHEL
> for work. I do not have the money to pay for RHEL. But I do contribute
> to open-source projects, some of which are part of RHEL.
> 
> I'm pretty sure IBM is behind this: They still do not like the
> open-source model. They only like money.
> 
> After 20 years of running and advocating for Redhat based Distros
> (Fedora on workstations, CentOS on servers) I night have to jump ship
> (if somebody is going to clone "classic" CentOS to keep tracing RHEL I
> might reconsider). Debian or Ubuntu: here I come. I will also no longer
> advocate for RHEL in the workplace where we used CentOS for
> non-production machines and RHEL for production.
> 
> Thanks for the hard work you put into CentOS over the years. Sorry to
> hear that it now turns out to have been wasted.
> 

I promise you, to the best of my knowledge, IBM had nothing to do with
this decision.  Red Hat is a distinct unit inside IBM and Red Hat still
has a CEO, CFO, etc.  Red Hat also maintains a neutral relationship with
many IBM competitors. So this was not an IBM decision.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/8/20 1:04 PM, Paul Heinlein wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, Rich Bowen wrote:
> 
>> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next
>> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat
>> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of
>> a current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will
>> end at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date,
>> serving as the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
> 
> I suppose I understand the negative feedback -- CentOS 8.x will no
> longer be a rebuild of RHEL 8.x but will instead be some version of RHEL
> 8.(x + 1) -- but I'm much more interested in empirical results than in
> suppositions. I've taken a couple test VMs and set them to CentOS 8
> Stream and will keep an eye on them. They will either prove stable or
> not, but (observation > guessing) in my book.
> 
> If history is any guide, they will prove very stable. If not, then I'll
> pour one out for CentOS and look elsewhere.
> 

Which is the approach I recommend everyone take.

And, it will likely be sometime mid to late 1st quarter 2021 before
CentOS Stream is in its 'Fully Functional' state with community pull
requests and the RHEL package maintainer doing all the work in CentOS
Stream, etc .  CentOS Linux 8 will still be available and updated until
the end of December 2021.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[centos]

On 08/12/2020 15:48, Johnny Hughes wrote:

On 12/8/20 8:35 AM, Bill Gee wrote:

Aside from the the latest shiny - what are the advantages of CentOS 8 Stream?  
What are the benefits?

I read through the announcement and FAQ, but they do not address that question. 
 Is it just a name change?  Is it an attempt to put CentOS on a subscription 
model?


Stream is the RHEL sorce code for rhel + 0.1 .. so durng the 8.3 rhel
cycle, stream will be rhel 8.4 source code.

It is not very far ahead of the current code.  It is indeed the code you
will get in 6 months.  It is not 'new shiny' .. it is newer enterprise.

What are the benefits:

1)  Many people (like Intel and Facebook) are providing feedback in real
time.  So can any user.  They should have in place, before RHEL 9
development starts, the ability to accept public community pull requests
into stream.

2)  This code is still RHEL source code .. it is just not released in
rhel yet.  Almost all of it will be released in the upcoming RHEL point
release.

3)  Most bugs will get fixed faster, if the code is pulled into stream.
  Many times you don't get the fix until the next point release .. and
this will be what stream is.


You are putting lipstick on a pig. Let's face it: This is IBM pulling 
the plug on CentOS.


Not a single one of those "benefits" will benefit *me*. I am a private 
user hosting his own machines with CentOS for stability but using RHEL 
for work. I do not have the money to pay for RHEL. But I do contribute 
to open-source projects, some of which are part of RHEL.


I'm pretty sure IBM is behind this: They still do not like the 
open-source model. They only like money.


After 20 years of running and advocating for Redhat based Distros 
(Fedora on workstations, CentOS on servers) I night have to jump ship 
(if somebody is going to clone "classic" CentOS to keep tracing RHEL I 
might reconsider). Debian or Ubuntu: here I come. I will also no longer 
advocate for RHEL in the workplace where we used CentOS for 
non-production machines and RHEL for production.


Thanks for the hard work you put into CentOS over the years. Sorry to 
hear that it now turns out to have been wasted.


peter
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Paul Heinlein]

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020, Rich Bowen wrote:

The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next year 
we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat Enterprise 
Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a current RHEL 
release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end at the end of 2021. 
CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as the upstream 
(development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.


I suppose I understand the negative feedback -- CentOS 8.x will no 
longer be a rebuild of RHEL 8.x but will instead be some version of 
RHEL 8.(x + 1) -- but I'm much more interested in empirical results 
than in suppositions. I've taken a couple test VMs and set them to 
CentOS 8 Stream and will keep an eye on them. They will either prove 
stable or not, but (observation > guessing) in my book.


If history is any guide, they will prove very stable. If not, then 
I'll pour one out for CentOS and look elsewhere.


--
Paul Heinlein
heinl...@madboa.com
45°38' N, 122°6' W
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[J Martin Rushton via CentOS]

The first thing Oracle wants is for you to sign up for an Oracle 
account.  Hmm, I'll give Springdale a try.  For those with long 
memories, remember the DEC RDMS promises prior to take over, and the 
aftermath?


On 08/12/2020 15:58, Julio E. Gonzalez wrote:

I am already using Oracle Linux in some servers.

Free as CentOS, faster updates than CentOS, and with some extra support, 
BTRFS and a newer kernel, for example.



On 12/8/20 12:15 PM, Pete Biggs wrote:


Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to make
sure it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any resources
into it"

So as far as I can see all the RHEL rebuilds are dead now - WhiteBox,
Scientific Linux, now CentOS. Are there any left?

P.




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


--
J Martin Rushton MBCS
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Le 08/12/2020 à 16:54, Marc Balmer via CentOS a écrit :
> This really pisses me off.  You published CentOS 8 with a promise to support
> it until May 2029.
> 
> Now you betray all users that took you by the mouth by stating it's EOL
> december 31. 2021.
> 
> Do you really think that was a smart move?

Why am I suddenly humming this ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wffRNjGGr4E

:o)

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Site : https://www.microlinux.fr
Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Nicolas Kovacs]

Le 08/12/2020 à 16:12, Johnny Hughes a écrit :
> Another very good thing
> 
> There is no longer a huge delay of a drop of 750 packages at once and a
> delay of more than a month to get a new release.
> 
> There will be on delay in stream .. it will be a constantly rolling
> distribution .. updates will happen all the time with no 'big drop' at
> point release time.

When I read the first messages of this thread, I was quite concerned. But
having read through your detailed explanations, let me state that I'm reassured.

As a sysadmin, what I like about CentOS is that it's probably the most *boring*
Linux distribution out there. Boring is good. No drama, no surprises. I know I
can have yum-cron run once a day without Icinga suddenly sending me a tsunami
of failure alerts and without clients calling me and yelling on the phone.

Cheers,

Niki

-- 
Microlinux - Solutions informatiques durables
7, place de l'église - 30730 Montpezat
Site : https://www.microlinux.fr
Blog : https://blog.microlinux.fr
Mail : i...@microlinux.fr
Tél. : 04 66 63 10 32
Mob. : 06 51 80 12 12
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[J Martin Rushton via CentOS]

To be fair, that was a commitment RH gave.  They are now a department 
within Big Blue and must dance to their tune.  Of course you 
could always try holding your breath and awaiting the sell off to Lenovo 
in about five years time.


On 08/12/2020 16:25, Lange, Markus wrote:

Hi,

this is really bad news.

Back in 2014 [1], sadly no one at RH seems to remember...

"Some of the things that are not changing:
- - The CentOS Linux platform isn't changing. The process and methods
built up around the platform however are going to become more open,
more inclusive and transparent.
- - The sponsor driven content network that has been central to the
success of the CentOS efforts over the years stays intact.
- - The bugs, issues, and incident handling process stays as it has
been
with more opportunities for community members to get involved at
various stages of the process.
- - The Red Hat Enterprise Linux to CentOS firewall will also remain.
Members and contributors to the CentOS efforts are still isolated from
the RHEL Groups inside Red Hat, with the only interface being srpm /
source path tracking, no sooner than is considered released. In
summary:  we retain an upstream.

Feel free to reach out if you have specific concerns about how this
change impacts your CentOS story. URLs mentioned at the bottom of this
email should be a good starting point."

Crossing fingers that alternatives emerge soon.

Best regards,
Markus

[1]
https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2014-January/020100.html


--
J Martin Rushton MBCS
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Lange, Markus]

Hi,

this is really bad news.

Back in 2014 [1], sadly no one at RH seems to remember...

"Some of the things that are not changing:
- - The CentOS Linux platform isn't changing. The process and methods
built up around the platform however are going to become more open,
more inclusive and transparent.
- - The sponsor driven content network that has been central to the
success of the CentOS efforts over the years stays intact.
- - The bugs, issues, and incident handling process stays as it has
been
with more opportunities for community members to get involved at
various stages of the process.
- - The Red Hat Enterprise Linux to CentOS firewall will also remain.
Members and contributors to the CentOS efforts are still isolated from
the RHEL Groups inside Red Hat, with the only interface being srpm /
source path tracking, no sooner than is considered released. In
summary:  we retain an upstream.

Feel free to reach out if you have specific concerns about how this
change impacts your CentOS story. URLs mentioned at the bottom of this
email should be a good starting point."

Crossing fingers that alternatives emerge soon.

Best regards,
Markus

[1] 
https://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-announce/2014-January/020100.html


On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 09:06 -0500, Rich Bowen wrote:
> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next 
> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red
> Hat 
> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of
> a 
> current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will
> end 
> at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving
> as 
> the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
> 
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS
> Linux 
> 7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder
> of 
> the RHEL 7 life cycle. 
> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
> 
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in 
> collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This 
> ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the
> next 
> version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather 
> than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS 
> contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of
> RHEL. 
> And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux 
> distribution ecosystem.
> 
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option
> will 
> be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS 
> Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux
> releases. 
> If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are 
> concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage
> you 
> to contact Red Hat about options.
> 
> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your 
> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of 
> project focus might affect you.
> 
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this. 
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]
> 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Laack, Andrea P]

Many CentOS users are also RedHat customers.  Those RedHat customers may 
currently be rethinking their RedHat investment given this change of events.  
We currently run Oracle Linux on a number of servers and have been very pleased 
with it.

Andrea

-Original Message-
From: CentOS  On Behalf Of Phelps, Matthew
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 10:01 AM
To: CentOS mailing list 
Subject: {EXTERNAL} Re: [CentOS] 
https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/


CAUTION:  This email originated outside of BSWH; avoid action unless you know 
the content is safe. Send suspicious emails as attachments to 
badem...@bswhealth.org.

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:58 AM Julio E. Gonzalez 
wrote:

> I am already using Oracle Linux in some servers.
>
> Free as CentOS, faster updates than CentOS, and with some extra 
> support, BTRFS and a newer kernel, for example.
>
>
>
I expect their usage is about to explode.

I've always feared a greater betrayal by Oracle than CentOS, but that clearly 
isn't the case now.


On 12/8/20 12:15 PM, Pete Biggs wrote:
> >
> > Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to 
> > make sure it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any 
> > resources into it"
> >
> > So as far as I can see all the RHEL rebuilds are dead now - 
> > WhiteBox, Scientific Linux, now CentOS. Are there any left?
> >
> > P.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > CentOS mailing list
> > CentOS@centos.org
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinf
> > o/centos__;!!JA_k2roV-A!V3VBB8oav3lezmsEBK2l0Dtvdz3K206E3zTa5QNoFgSs
> > k0QcADKf4pjnRdA9r_SWug$
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/
> centos__;!!JA_k2roV-A!V3VBB8oav3lezmsEBK2l0Dtvdz3K206E3zTa5QNoFgSsk0Qc
> ADKf4pjnRdA9r_SWug$
>


-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook 
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://cfa.harvard.edu/facebook__;!!JA_k2roV-A!V3VBB8oav3lezmsEBK2l0Dtvdz3K206E3zTa5QNoFgSsk0QcADKf4pjnRdDPNAYgug$
 > | Twitter 
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://cfa.harvard.edu/twitter__;!!JA_k2roV-A!V3VBB8oav3lezmsEBK2l0Dtvdz3K206E3zTa5QNoFgSsk0QcADKf4pjnRdCFI1IfHg$
 > | YouTube 
<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://cfa.harvard.edu/youtube__;!!JA_k2roV-A!V3VBB8oav3lezmsEBK2l0Dtvdz3K206E3zTa5QNoFgSsk0QcADKf4pjnRdDSRSGvaw$
 >
| Newsletter 
| <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://cfa.harvard.edu/newsletter__;!!JA_
| k2roV-A!V3VBB8oav3lezmsEBK2l0Dtvdz3K206E3zTa5QNoFgSsk0QcADKf4pjnRdDFOb
| FIcw$ >
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos__;!!JA_k2roV-A!V3VBB8oav3lezmsEBK2l0Dtvdz3K206E3zTa5QNoFgSsk0QcADKf4pjnRdA9r_SWug$
 

**
The information contained in this e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, 
and protected from disclosure, and no waiver of any attorney-client, work 
product, or other privilege is intended.  If you are the intended recipient, 
further disclosures are prohibited without proper authorization. If you are not 
the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify 
the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, 
disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden 
and possibly a violation of federal or state law and regulations. The sender 
and Baylor Scott & White Health, and its affiliated entities, hereby expressly 
reserve all privileges and confidentiality that might otherwise be waived as a 
result of an erroneous or misdirected e-mail transmission. No employee or agent 
is authorized to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of Baylor Scott & 
White Health, or any affiliated entity, by e-mail without express written 
confirmation by the CEO, the Senior Vice President of Supply Chain Services or 
other duly authorized representative of Baylor Scott & White Health.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[John Thomas]

I'll probably switch to Debian over the new year.


On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 8:01 AM Phelps, Matthew 
wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:58 AM Julio E. Gonzalez 
> wrote:
>
> > I am already using Oracle Linux in some servers.
> >
> > Free as CentOS, faster updates than CentOS, and with some extra support,
> > BTRFS and a newer kernel, for example.
> >
> >
> >
> I expect their usage is about to explode.
>
> I've always feared a greater betrayal by Oracle than CentOS, but that
> clearly isn't the case now.
>
>
> On 12/8/20 12:15 PM, Pete Biggs wrote:
> > >
> > > Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to make
> > > sure it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any resources
> > > into it"
> > >
> > > So as far as I can see all the RHEL rebuilds are dead now - WhiteBox,
> > > Scientific Linux, now CentOS. Are there any left?
> > >
> > > P.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > CentOS mailing list
> > > CentOS@centos.org
> > > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >
> > ___
> > CentOS mailing list
> > CentOS@centos.org
> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> >
>
>
> --
>
> *Matt Phelps*
>
> *Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*
>
> (Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)
>
> Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian
>
>
> 60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
> email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu
>
>
> cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
>  | YouTube  >
> | Newsletter 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Phelps, Matthew]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 10:58 AM Julio E. Gonzalez 
wrote:

> I am already using Oracle Linux in some servers.
>
> Free as CentOS, faster updates than CentOS, and with some extra support,
> BTRFS and a newer kernel, for example.
>
>
>
I expect their usage is about to explode.

I've always feared a greater betrayal by Oracle than CentOS, but that
clearly isn't the case now.


On 12/8/20 12:15 PM, Pete Biggs wrote:
> >
> > Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to make
> > sure it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any resources
> > into it"
> >
> > So as far as I can see all the RHEL rebuilds are dead now - WhiteBox,
> > Scientific Linux, now CentOS. Are there any left?
> >
> > P.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > CentOS mailing list
> > CentOS@centos.org
> > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


-- 

*Matt Phelps*

*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*

(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian


60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphe...@cfa.harvard.edu


cfa.harvard.edu | Facebook  | Twitter
 | YouTube 
| Newsletter 
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Julio E. Gonzalez]

I am already using Oracle Linux in some servers.

Free as CentOS, faster updates than CentOS, and with some extra support, 
BTRFS and a newer kernel, for example.



On 12/8/20 12:15 PM, Pete Biggs wrote:


Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to make
sure it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any resources
into it"

So as far as I can see all the RHEL rebuilds are dead now - WhiteBox,
Scientific Linux, now CentOS. Are there any left?

P.




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Marc Balmer via CentOS]

This really pisses me off.  You published CentOS 8 with a promise to support it 
until May 2029.

Now you betray all users that took you by the mouth by stating it's EOL 
december 31. 2021.

Do you really think that was a smart move?

> Am 08.12.2020 um 15:06 schrieb Rich Bowen :
> 
> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next year 
> we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat Enterprise 
> Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a current RHEL 
> release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end at the end of 2021. 
> CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as the upstream 
> (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
> 
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux 7, 
> and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of the RHEL 
> 7 life cycle. 
> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
> 
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in collaboration 
> among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This ensures SIGs are 
> developing and testing against what becomes the next version of RHEL. This 
> also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather than having to build and test 
> for two releases. It gives the CentOS contributor community a great deal of 
> influence in the future of RHEL. And it removes confusion around what 
> “CentOS” means in the Linux distribution ecosystem.
> 
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will be to 
> migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS Linux 8, and 
> has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases. If you are using 
> CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are concerned that CentOS 
> Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you to contact Red Hat about 
> options.
> 
> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your 
> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of project 
> focus might affect you.
> 
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this. 
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]
> 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Harold Toms]

On 08/12/2020 15:15, Pete Biggs wrote:


So as far as I can see all the RHEL rebuilds are dead now - WhiteBox,
Scientific Linux, now CentOS. Are there any left?


Springdale:

http://springdale.math.ias.edu/


--
Harold Toms
SBCS NMR Manager
Working from home

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Laack, Andrea P]

It appears that Red Hat has taken ownership of a free and opensource OS and is 
now making decisions regarding it.  Maybe it is time to look at Oracle Linux.

Andrea

-Original Message-
From: CentOS  On Behalf Of Pete Biggs
Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2020 9:15 AM
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: {EXTERNAL} Re: [CentOS] 
https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/


CAUTION:  This email originated outside of BSWH; avoid action unless you know 
the content is safe. Send suspicious emails as attachments to 
badem...@bswhealth.org.


Forgive a bit of cynicism ...

On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 09:06 -0500, Rich Bowen wrote:
> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next 
> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat 
> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of 
> a current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will 
> end at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, 
> serving as the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

"If you want to keep using RHEL for free, you will have to put up with making 
sure that our paying customers get better quality releases"

> 
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS 
> Linux 7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the 
> remainder of the RHEL 7 life cycle.
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/u
> pdates/errata/*Life_Cycle_Dates__;Iw!!JA_k2roV-A!TV5uC89TVscCRwr7zzXLD
> C5qXG9icBBoFhbvuzaIQd8c6FERiSUJfbDgNxr_uWxezw$

"If you really want to have a stable release for free, stick to 7"

> 
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in 
> collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This 
> ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the next 
> version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather 
> than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS 
> contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of RHEL.

"CentOS will become the developer playground"

> And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux 
> distribution ecosystem.

Was there any confusion? If there is, then it's caused by the introduction of 
things like "CentOS Stream".  There was never any confusion when it was a 
straight rebuild.

> 
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will 
> be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS 
> Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases.
> If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are 
> concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage 
> you to contact Red Hat about options.

"If you want a production environment, pay for it"

> 
> We have an FAQ - 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://centos.org/distro-faq/__;!!JA_k2ro
> V-A!TV5uC89TVscCRwr7zzXLDC5qXG9icBBoFhbvuzaIQd8c6FERiSUJfbDgNxpK0XXHGg$  - to 
> help with your information and planning needs, as you figure out how this 
> shift of project focus might affect you.

The FAQ generally says "if you want a RHEL environment, then pay for it"

> 
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this. 
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stre
> am-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux__;!!JA_k2roV-A!TV5uC89T
> VscCRwr7zzXLDC5qXG9icBBoFhbvuzaIQd8c6FERiSUJfbDgNxqzGbXGpw$ ]
> 
Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to make sure 
it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any resources into it"

So as far as I can see all the RHEL rebuilds are dead now - WhiteBox, 
Scientific Linux, now CentOS. Are there any left?

P.




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos__;!!JA_k2roV-A!TV5uC89TVscCRwr7zzXLDC5qXG9icBBoFhbvuzaIQd8c6FERiSUJfbDgNxq1bmMMCA$
 

**
The information contained in this e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, 
and protected from disclosure, and no waiver of any attorney-client, work 
product, or other privilege is intended.  If you are the intended recipient, 
further disclosures are prohibited without proper authorization. If you are not 
the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify 
the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, 
disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden 
and possibly a violation of federal or state law and regulations. The sender 
and Baylor Scott & White Health, and its affiliated entities, hereby expr

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Pete Biggs]

Forgive a bit of cynicism ...

On Tue, 2020-12-08 at 09:06 -0500, Rich Bowen wrote:
> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next 
> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat 
> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a 
> current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end 
> at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as 
> the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

"If you want to keep using RHEL for free, you will have to put up with
making sure that our paying customers get better quality releases"

> 
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux 
> 7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of 
> the RHEL 7 life cycle. 
> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates

"If you really want to have a stable release for free, stick to 7"

> 
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in 
> collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This 
> ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the next 
> version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather 
> than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS 
> contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of RHEL. 

"CentOS will become the developer playground"

> And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux 
> distribution ecosystem.

Was there any confusion? If there is, then it's caused by the
introduction of things like "CentOS Stream".  There was never any
confusion when it was a straight rebuild.

> 
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will 
> be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS 
> Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases. 
> If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are 
> concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you 
> to contact Red Hat about options.

"If you want a production environment, pay for it"

> 
> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your 
> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of 
> project focus might affect you.

The FAQ generally says "if you want a RHEL environment, then pay for
it"

> 
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this. 
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]
> 
Red Hat's perspective is "CentOS is ours now; IBM have told us to make
sure it's pulling its weight or we aren't allowed to put any resources
into it"

So as far as I can see all the RHEL rebuilds are dead now - WhiteBox,
Scientific Linux, now CentOS. Are there any left?

P.




___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/8/20 8:35 AM, Bill Gee wrote:
> Aside from the the latest shiny - what are the advantages of CentOS 8 Stream? 
>  What are the benefits?
> 
> I read through the announcement and FAQ, but they do not address that 
> question.  Is it just a name change?  Is it an attempt to put CentOS on a 
> subscription model?
> 


Another very good thing

There is no longer a huge delay of a drop of 750 packages at once and a
delay of more than a month to get a new release.

There will be on delay in stream .. it will be a constantly rolling
distribution .. updates will happen all the time with no 'big drop' at
point release time.

Just do a thought experiment and think about the current process and how
stream works.  There is no reason you can not use CentOS Stream for what
you use CentOS Linux for now.

I know what the knee jerk reaction is .. but put that aside and really
look at the timing of code and release of packages, etc.

If you don't like how it turns out .. then shift to another platform.
You (and we) have a full year to show you the benefits of Stream.

Is Ubuntu or Debian any better wrt package versions and enterprise?

How really different is RHEL 8.3 from 8.2 .. or 8.4 from 8.3?

Just look at the facts and make the choice that is appropriate for your
situation.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Leon Fauster via CentOS]

Am 08.12.20 um 15:15 schrieb Tom Bishop:

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 8:07 AM Rich Bowen  wrote:


The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next
year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat
Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a
current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end
at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as
the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux
7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of
the RHEL 7 life cycle.
https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates

CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in
collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This
ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the next
version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather
than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS
contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of RHEL.
And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux
distribution ecosystem.

When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will
be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS
Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases.
If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are
concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you
to contact Red Hat about options.

We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your
information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of
project focus might affect you.

[See also: Red Hat's perspective on this.

https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux
]



Wow, major shift in philosophy, thanks for all the hard work over the years
but if I wanted to be a beta tester there are many distributions that will
serve that purpose, real shame.

The king is dead, long live the king!



Making such a cut at the beginning of CentOS8 life is remarkable.
We did a lot work to migrate to C8? Honestly, this had to be done
before C8 or at the end of C8 but not now?

--
Leon

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Johnny Hughes]

On 12/8/20 8:35 AM, Bill Gee wrote:
> Aside from the the latest shiny - what are the advantages of CentOS 8 Stream? 
>  What are the benefits?
> 
> I read through the announcement and FAQ, but they do not address that 
> question.  Is it just a name change?  Is it an attempt to put CentOS on a 
> subscription model?
> 

Stream is the RHEL sorce code for rhel + 0.1 .. so durng the 8.3 rhel
cycle, stream will be rhel 8.4 source code.

It is not very far ahead of the current code.  It is indeed the code you
will get in 6 months.  It is not 'new shiny' .. it is newer enterprise.

What are the benefits:

1)  Many people (like Intel and Facebook) are providing feedback in real
time.  So can any user.  They should have in place, before RHEL 9
development starts, the ability to accept public community pull requests
into stream.

2)  This code is still RHEL source code .. it is just not released in
rhel yet.  Almost all of it will be released in the upcoming RHEL point
release.

3)  Most bugs will get fixed faster, if the code is pulled into stream.
 Many times you don't get the fix until the next point release .. and
this will be what stream is.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Bill Gee]

Aside from the the latest shiny - what are the advantages of CentOS 8 Stream?  
What are the benefits?

I read through the announcement and FAQ, but they do not address that question. 
 Is it just a name change?  Is it an attempt to put CentOS on a subscription 
model?

-- 
Bill Gee



On Tuesday, December 8, 2020 8:06:44 AM CST Rich Bowen wrote:
> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next 
> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat 
> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a 
> current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end 
> at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as 
> the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
> 
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux 
> 7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of 
> the RHEL 7 life cycle. 
> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
> 
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in 
> collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This 
> ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the next 
> version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather 
> than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS 
> contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of RHEL. 
> And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux 
> distribution ecosystem.
> 
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will 
> be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS 
> Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases. 
> If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are 
> concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you 
> to contact Red Hat about options.
> 
> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your 
> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of 
> project focus might affect you.
> 
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this. 
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]
> 
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
> 

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Tom Bishop]

On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 8:07 AM Rich Bowen  wrote:

> The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next
> year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a
> current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end
> at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as
> the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
>
> Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux
> 7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of
> the RHEL 7 life cycle.
> https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates
>
> CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in
> collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This
> ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the next
> version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather
> than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS
> contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of RHEL.
> And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux
> distribution ecosystem.
>
> When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will
> be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS
> Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases.
> If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are
> concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you
> to contact Red Hat about options.
>
> We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your
> information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of
> project focus might affect you.
>
> [See also: Red Hat's perspective on this.
>
> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux
> ]
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Wow, major shift in philosophy, thanks for all the hard work over the years
but if I wanted to be a beta tester there are many distributions that will
serve that purpose, real shame.

The king is dead, long live the king!
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] https://blog.centos.org/2020/12/future-is-centos-stream/

[Rich Bowen]

The future of the CentOS Project is CentOS Stream, and over the next 
year we’ll be shifting focus from CentOS Linux, the rebuild of Red Hat 
Enterprise Linux (RHEL), to CentOS Stream, which tracks just ahead of a 
current RHEL release. CentOS Linux 8, as a rebuild of RHEL 8, will end 
at the end of 2021. CentOS Stream continues after that date, serving as 
the upstream (development) branch of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.


Meanwhile, we understand many of you are deeply invested in CentOS Linux 
7, and we’ll continue to produce that version through the remainder of 
the RHEL 7 life cycle. 
https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata/#Life_Cycle_Dates


CentOS Stream will also be the centerpiece of a major shift in 
collaboration among the CentOS Special Interest Groups (SIGs). This 
ensures SIGs are developing and testing against what becomes the next 
version of RHEL. This also provides SIGs a clear single goal, rather 
than having to build and test for two releases. It gives the CentOS 
contributor community a great deal of influence in the future of RHEL. 
And it removes confusion around what “CentOS” means in the Linux 
distribution ecosystem.


When CentOS Linux 8 (the rebuild of RHEL8) ends, your best option will 
be to migrate to CentOS Stream 8, which is a small delta from CentOS 
Linux 8, and has regular updates like traditional CentOS Linux releases. 
If you are using CentOS Linux 8 in a production environment, and are 
concerned that CentOS Stream will not meet your needs, we encourage you 
to contact Red Hat about options.


We have an FAQ - https://centos.org/distro-faq/ - to help with your 
information and planning needs, as you figure out how this shift of 
project focus might affect you.


[See also: Red Hat's perspective on this. 
https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux]


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos