On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 12:19:18PM +0000, James M. Pulver wrote: > > Believe me, I'd prefer to not deal with technical licenses and have a simple > site licence option for software. I have more than enough commercial software > on Windows that I have to support that add way too much time just for their > crappy licensing changes etc... >
To amplify. "free" licenses are only free in the sense that cost of my labour is valued at $0/hour. "A free license here, a free license there", can quickly add up to 1 FTE or more to handle them. K.O. > > -- > James Pulver > CLASSE Computer Group > Cornell University > > > > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] > <[email protected]> on behalf of Mark Stodola > <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, May 4, 2021 4:42 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: scientific-linux-users > Subject: Re: any update on CERN Linux and CentOS-8 situation? > > For our use, free is definitely a positive, but not a requirement. > > We deploy our product's control systems and are really looking for the > long term stability and security patches. I wouldn't have a problem > with purchasing licenses, as long as it didn't get in the way. That > meaning, not having to deal with serial numbers, subscriptions, and > phoning home. I want something I can buy, deploy, and forget about with > regards to licensing. This is a logistics issue. I don't want to dump > that responsibility on our customer long term and not all of our > machines are remotely accessible to manage ongoing license maintenance. > > This is likely in stark contrast to the HEP community, as I see that > more of a site-wide deployment managed by a team dedicated to the job. > > Best Regards, > Mark > > -- > Mr. Mark V. Stodola > Control Systems Manager > > National Electrostatics Corp. > P.O. Box 620310 > Middleton, WI 53562-0310 USA > Phone: (608) 831-7600 > Fax: (608) 831-9591 > > On 5/4/21 2:51 PM, James M. Pulver wrote: > > Honestly, I've seen a lot of the FLOSS community prefer Rocky over Alma, > > and I think it's because Rocky is actually not backed by any company. > > However, we see how that went before, and I just think Rocky as described > > is ripe for CENTOS 2.0 to me. It's even run by one of the CENTOS founders, > > so -- maybe he's learned his lesson, but I don't see that as a positive for > > Rocky - it's neutral at best. I mean, CENTOS was bought by Red Hat and then > > "killed". Oracle? not even a blip. CloudLinux? Not a blip. Princeton, not a > > blip. I.e. all the rebuilds with a organization behind them that isn't > > dependent totally on community funding were basically unaffected here. The > > major distros that are going strong are company backed (Including SuSE, > > Ubuntu, RHEL, etc), except for Debian that seems to be the exception that > > proves the rule to me. And most of what Yasha et al seem to be looking for > > is a professional rebuild that is free - which might be a contradiction in > > terms, except for communities maintaining what they need for their use. > > > > This is why I (and I guess Yasha etc) are so disappointed that all the HEP > > labs can't get together to fund what? 5 FTE across all of them to re-create > > SL for the HEP community? Or some sort of Internet2 license that is > > affordable of RHEL (maybe that's the secret goal). Is that really a huge > > part of the CERN, Fermilab, etc all the labs budget? I imagine it's less > > than the commercial RHEL license costs. But we do have Alma (and others, > > including Oracle - wish I trusted them even a little) donating that rebuild > > to the world at large, so there's some people interested in putting > > donations out there. > > > > Anyway, digression aside, it's hard to do more than wait and see I guess - > > and much of that waiting is maybe for EL9 and to see if Rocky releases > > something that creates a better community than Alma has managed. Though I'm > > still betting on a company backed project getting going and keeping going > > much better in the short term anyway. > > -- > > James Pulver > > CLASSE Computer Group > > Cornell University > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: [email protected] > > <[email protected]> on behalf of Jack > > Aboutboul <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 4, 2021 2:39 PM > > To: Dave Dykstra > > Cc: Bonnie King; Konstantin Olchanski; scientific-linux-users > > Subject: Re: any update on CERN Linux and CentOS-8 situation? > > > > Dave, > > > > Thanks for your response. My message was going to everyone on the list, not > > necessarily just the decision makers. To me/us it’s important to involve > > the whole community not just any specific decision makers. > > > > Thanks for your feedback. If you don’t mind, can you just give me more > > insight/feedback as to why you think that Rocky is better positioned? I’m > > curious to hear your opinion. > > > > Thanks, > > Jack > > > >> On May 4, 2021, at 11:30, Dave Dykstra <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Jack, > >> > >> I am not involved in the decision-making regarding Linux here at > >> Fermilab, so I'm just a community member as well. I think it's good > >> to have options but in my opinion the Rocky Linux effort is better > >> positioned for long term support by the community than AlmaLinux is. > >> > >> Dave > >> > >> On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 05:54:35PM -0400, Jack Aboutboul wrote: > >>> Hi Bonnie, Dave, et. al. > >>> > >>> I am a long time Fedora person and now the community manager of AlmaLinux. > >>> > >>> We certainly understand the quandary you are now in and we deeply value > >>> the work that you and the scientific (both capital S and lower-case) > >>> community do. It is of utmost importance to humanity. Likewise, we can > >>> only begin to image the loop that the CentOS EOL announcement must have > >>> caused you. > >>> > >>> We are ready, willing and able to help. We released our x86_64 STABLE a > >>> drop over a month ago and are working on other architectures now. We are > >>> also in the process of opening up our-next generation build system, > >>> amongst other things. > >>> > >>> I extend a hand to the Scientific community-at-large to work together > >>> with you all to build whatever it is that you need. We are even open to > >>> offering a board seat (yes despite what FUD people try and spread, we are > >>> community-governed) to someone from fermilab/cern (or some other > >>> representative) to ensure that the relevant voices are heard and acted > >>> upon. > >>> > >>> I'm reaching out to you out of my own volition, because I respect you and > >>> the work you do and its vital impact in the humanity both present and > >>> future. > >>> > >>> Seriously, anything we can do for you guys, any way we can help in order > >>> to promote and foster scientific research, we stand at the fore ready to > >>> get it done. > >>> > >>> I am sure there may be questions and I would be glad to answer anything > >>> anyone would like to know more about. > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> Jack > >>> > >>>> On May 3, 2021, at 07:25, Bonnie King <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi Konstantin, > >>>> > >>>> There hasn't been any official statement. On the Fermilab side we are > >>>> holding discussions and gathering feedback from experiments and other > >>>> collaborators. > >>>> > >>>> We are working on it and will make an announcement soon. > >>>> > >>>> Bonnie King > >>>> > >>>> ________________________________________ > >>>> From: [email protected] > >>>> <[email protected]> on behalf of Konstantin > >>>> Olchanski <[email protected]> > >>>> Sent: Saturday, May 1, 2021 9:27 AM > >>>> To: Dave Dykstra > >>>> Cc: scientific-linux-users > >>>> Subject: Re: any update on CERN Linux and CentOS-8 situation? > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 09:35:02PM +0000, Dave Dykstra wrote: > >>>>> Both Fermilab and CERN have stated that they plan to use CentOS 8 stream > >>>>> for now (or Scientific Linux 7 or CentOS 7) and will evaluate later > >>>>> whether or not to switch to one of the clones. > >>>> Interesting. I do not see any information about this and I believe > >>>> I receive both internal and external official communications from CERN. > >>>> > >>>> Do you know who and when made this "centos stream" statement? > >>>> > >>>> K.O. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Dave > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 10:35:18AM -0700, Konstantin Olchanski wrote: > >>>>>> Any news or updates on the status of CERN Linux? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Per https://linux.web.cern.ch/centos8/ CERN users are strongly > >>>>>> encouraged > >>>>>> to use CentOS-8 while the same page states that support for CentOS-8 > >>>>>> will > >>>>>> end at the end of this year. Update is promised "during Q1 2021", today > >>>>>> we are 1/3 into Q2 2021, and there is no new information. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The CentOS forums are graveyard quiet. (censored?) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Any information from the FermiLab side of things? Any information from > >>>>>> the SL side > >>>>>> of things? Any rumours? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I opened a support ticket with CERN about this, let's see what they > >>>>>> say. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Konstantin Olchanski > >>>>>> Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow! > >>>>>> Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca > >>>>>> Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, > >>>>>> Canada > >>>> -- > >>>> Konstantin Olchanski > >>>> Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow! > >>>> Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca > >>>> Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada -- Konstantin Olchanski Data Acquisition Systems: The Bytes Must Flow! Email: olchansk-at-triumf-dot-ca Snail mail: 4004 Wesbrook Mall, TRIUMF, Vancouver, B.C., V6T 2A3, Canada
