Dear Yasha [...]
>> > From a query I posted on this matter to the SL list: > > 2. Evidently, Singh and other "core" CentOS team members actually are > Red Hat employees, > just as the core SL team have been Fermilab or CERN employees > (presumably in some cases > actually paid by the research collaborations funded by various > government agencies through > various universities -- e.g., in the USA, NSF or DOE with each PI > typically holding a > tenure-stream faculty position at a university). Will the core SL team > or the core CERN linux > team likewise become Red Hat employees? CERN linux team is and will be CERN employees: Our only relationship with Red Hat is that we are customers. To clarify little bit: Our primary mission at CERN is to provide support for linux platform for our customers - experiments and working groups - not to build linux distribution. (yes - we did it in last 10 years since in 2004 this was the "only" option) > > End question. > > Are Jerek Polok et al. now Red Hat employees, or still CERN "employees"? > Yes we are CERN employees: the fact of using this or that linux version does not change it - why would it ? > Additional questions: > > A. Will the SL/SLC source tree for RPM builds be a separate copy from > the CentOS git, downloaded therefrom? I am speaking for SLC here: no: we are going to use CentOS. > > A.1 Will the SL/SLC source tree be compared to the original SRPMs that > CERN seems to have under license from Red Hat to verify > that the CentOS git source is in fact "unadulterated" RHEL 7 source, > other than for obvious Red Hat logos and the like? > Speaking for SLC here: yes, we could do it (so could SL and anybody else), but please note: this does not change anything for everybody else on this list: if somebody decides to distrust Red Hat and CentOS ... why would that person trust us ? ... > B. Jarek states above: Whatever the case, there will continue to exist > a linux of production quality and of free or affordable cost. That was actually a quote from Konstantin's post- but I fully agree with it. > What is > "affordable cost" and to what is this "cost" to be paid? Red Hat? > CERN? Fermilab (technically, the consortium responsible for operating > Fermilab as USA federally funded research facility) for USA-based > university sites using SL 7? For us at CERN the affordable cost is dedicating some resources (manpower/hardware/network bandwidth/ .. etc) towards support/maintenance (and development only if needed) of a freely distributable linux version matching our computing platform requirements. I do not fully understand your question about the cost to be paid I'm afraid: What is your current "cost" of using SL ? Why would that "cost" change if you use CentOS (or SL built with CentOS sources) ? Best Regards Jarek __ ------------------------------------------------------- _ Jaroslaw_Polok __________________ CERN - IT/OIS/WLS _ _ http://cern.ch/~jpolok ________ tel_+41_22_767_1834 _ _____________________________________ +41_76_487_9487 _
