Hi, many thanks for the comments on and off list. I'm top-posting to give an update: Many thanks to Dag who prompty offered a share of some of his licenses. I was also contacted by Red Hat Global Support Services that they will renew the expiring license pack for another year on the day it will expire, thanks to Marty at GSS for picking this up.
Also many thanks to the people offering to donate to a license fund, while it looks like it is not needed, it is still very much appreciated and fills up the motivation tanks again. :) On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 11:51:40PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > Hi, > > based on Red Hat's kind initiative on offering RHEL licenses three > years ago ATrpms has been building packages for RHEL3/4/5 on > i386/x86_64/ppc since (special thanks go to Chris Kloiber and Greg > Dekoenigsberg for making that happen), and have become a major 3rd > party package repository in the RHEL and clones community. > > What was once a two-platform support on one distro has grown into 3 > distros on three platforms increasing the number of licenses used for > pulling base packages and updates to build packages against. > > This must also have made it increasingly difficult for people inside > Red Hat to justify licensing for ATrpms' builders, so that there had > been some "outages" in the past where no new updates could be built > against due to expired, not-renewed licenses (thankfully these update > outages were short and not kernel update happened during that time). > > This is less a problem with RHEL compared to say Fedora due to the > very stable ABI, but especially in situations with kernel (security) > errata which imply rebuilds of all kmdls it is very painful to both > the repo maintainer and the users. > > Five of the 10 currently used licenses will expire in less than ten > days and all attempts to renew them have not worked out until now (the > other five will expire by December). There are several paths that > ATrpms can take: > > o Find someone to donate RHEL licenses > o Reduce the number of required licenses by dropping platforms. > ppc has not been the greatest hit judging from the download > statistics, so it could probably be canceled > o Reduce the number of required licenses by dropping distros. > RHEL3 has seen its glory days pass by as well. > o Switch from using RHEL to using CentOS/SL. > Until now ATrpms could claim to be safe from any possible rebuild > bugs, while CentOS/SL make a great job in reproducing the API/ABI of > RHEL there is always a small possibility to miss something. > o A mix of the above > > I'd prefer to keep building against RHEL, e.g. to continue to utilize > the set of 10 licenses, that's why there's this cry for help. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
pgpMd5PwfGFQX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
