I respectfully disagree. Some users can take a "wait and see attitude"
-- let us see how distro X (for any X) that is "new" or "developing"
evolves. It may, or may not, meet our needs. Others, of which the HEP
community (as with Fermilab and CERN) are prime examples, have to plan
ahead and cannot wait and see -- if distro X that appears that it will
meet needs in fact does not, there will be insufficient time to choose
another course. One way to look into the "crystal ball" as it were is
to observe current developments to limit the "hindsight is 20/20"
result. I have commented upon current developments that I have read
about and attempted to bring these to developments to the attention of
the SL community -- much of which reads this list. For the enthusiast
or amateur, a failure of Fedora or Ubuntu non-LTS, etc., may only mean
inconvenience -- just as the MS Win "blue screen of death" seems to mean
to many. For those who need a stable "secure" environment or platform,
and who must plan ahead, such "inconveniences" may be much more
consequential. It also is possible that mention of such developments
here may cause changes in distro X. The IBM acquisition of RH and the
end of CentOS as a no-fee executable installable EL shows that such
concerns do not always influence a distro, just as the HEP community no
longer had the disposable resources to produce SL 8, etc. (In the USA,
fundamental science that does not have a clear path to for-profit
private sector eventual deliverables continues to suffer; thus, the
Arecibo observatory is gone.)
On the contrary, I have had a number of correspondents express great
confidence that Rocky EL (or whatever name the distro ultimately is
titled) will be a fully reliable replica of production supported RHEL.
I hope they are correct; but if not, those who "gambled" upon it will
have to face the same situation as is now before the SL community -- how
to proceed. Hopefully, ELrepo and EPEL, etc., will continue to support
porting needed drivers and utilities to EL 8, 9, ... , and thus Rocky EL.
On 12/31/20 7:21 AM, Jon Pruente wrote:
On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 11:06 PM Yasha Karant <ykar...@gmail.com
<mailto:ykar...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Beef: Slang. a complaint.
an argument or dispute.
I do not have a complaint, argument, or dispute with Rocky EL or any
other distro, enthusiast, "enterprise", or supported for fee. The
issues are suitability, currency, hardening, and support mechanisms. I
can elaborate on any of these if there is interest. It is difficult,
but not impossible, to have a distro that does not have computer
science
and engineering professionals (not in the sense of necessarily using
this as in the sense of a significant source of gainful employment, nor
in the sense of formal academic diplomata -- Heaviside had no such
diplomata, but in the sense of knowledge, understanding, and skills, of
which Heaviside had sufficient in all three of these areas) doing the
implementation that is suitable for "hardened" production use,
including
converting a distribution source into a functioning alternately badged
but otherwise identical "executable" distribution.
You do have a beef. You post item after item "exposing" how Rocky is not
suitable for prime professional use, while ignoring that the project is
still developing. You post complaint after complaint about how it's a
volunteer run affair while you can only stomach using something that
people are paid specifically to do. You have the take that volunteerism
is bad for serious use, yet the whole CentOS debacle is rooted around
paid Red Hat employees scuttling the distro. Stop being pedantic and
just own up to the behavior we can see in your posts.
