Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by geerlingguy on Friday June 30, 2023 @08:45AM
(#36533876)
Part of the open source social contract is downstreaming too. You can't just take, promise to give back, and then hoard what you've built.
Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by happymellon on Friday June 30, 2023 @08:51AM
(#36533948)
There is no hording though.
What changes have they made to RHEL that isn't available?
downstreaming ? How is the open source social contract anymore than making source code available?
Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by geerlingguy on Friday June 30, 2023 @08:42PM
(#36544843)
That's what I mean. Not putting up a EULA dam. They don't have to build CentOS or assist anyone, but they can't block the code from flowing downhill.
According to Red Hat the source of RHEL is publicly available on CentOS Stream Gitlab, without a EULA.
Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by bubblethink on Saturday July 01, 2023 @05:30AM
(#36548334)
It's the upstream source, not the source used to build RHEL. RHEL is downstream of CentOS stream. Much like linux kernel's source is available, it does not help you much.
Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by worthless-trash on Saturday July 01, 2023 @08:48AM
(#36549546)
However, it is "exactly" that code, isnt it.. thats been my understanding.
Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by bubblethink on Saturday July 01, 2023 @12:36PM
(#36551914)
It may incidentally be in some cases, but isn't guaranteed to be. Things don't flow back up from RHEL to CentOS stream. Someone else mentioned that they were not able to build RHEL packages from CentOS stream.
Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by ungamedplayer on Saturday July 01, 2023 @09:56PM
(#36557413)
Do you have an example of this, since the project I work on definitely has its code synced to gitlab..
I believe that would be actuall evidence of gpl non compliance, not this dismisive current interpretation that people have.
I don't think that most people who commented have a subscription.
Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by bubblethink on Saturday July 01, 2023 @10:24PM
(#36557560)
Pushing things back to CentOS stream is not a requirement of GPL. GPL's role ends once RHEL customers get the source. Do you mean evidence of CentOS stream not being enough ? The post talks about it. Rocky needs to collate sources from several places now to create 1:1 RHEL rebuilds.
Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by worthless-trash on Wednesday July 05, 2023 @08:51PM
(#36609465)
> Do you mean evidence of CentOS stream not being enough ?
I think this is what I mean, yes.
The rhel trees are synced from the centos trees. If centos git trees couldnt build, rhel couldnt build. Afaics the only time this seems to be in conflict is for important and critical cve's , which are built on a rhel specific branch. After package release these branches are merged with centos, and the local rhel branches deleted and business continues as normal.
This is an attempt not to break embargo agreements with researchers who ask for it.
According to Red Hat it is. If you don't believe them you can get a Developer subscription to get a RHEL ISO to compare with a CentOS Stream ISO. I imagine a lot of people, myself included, would be interested in the analysis of that.
Re:Keeping Open Source Open
by bubblethink on Saturday July 01, 2023 @12:42PM
(#36551965)
So you do that analysis. Two downstream distros of RHEL have said that they cannot continue to offer RHEL rebuilds/updates without substantial changes. That means that it is not possible to use CentOS stream to build RHEL packages. You are free to do all the analysis in the world.
Is literally the only thing that would make people happy is to give away RHEL for free for people to run their production servers on?