• redcalcium
    link
    fedilink
    English
    112 years ago

    I was wondering when Red Hat enshittification would began the moment IBM announced the acquisition. Turns out it begins today.

    • @azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      They announced the discontinuation of CentOS in 2020. That’s when it started for me. This is just more of the same crusade against people “using RHEL for free” (which I’m sure none of the suits at IBM even begin to understand the value of, the real wonder is that RH managed to resist this move for so long).

      • @Link@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        Certainly in retrospect. Back then they defended the decision by saying they wanted to shift their resources to centos stream, and that would be fair enough. But now it’s clear that wasn’t their motivation at all. They wanted to kill the free RHEL fork in the hope to attract more customers, as a lot of people already suspected.

    • @albert@lemmy.sysctl.io
      link
      fedilink
      English
      02 years ago

      Took longer than I expected tbh. Time to reimage all my Rocky servers I guess. I really liked the 10 years of support they offered.

  • Doink
    link
    fedilink
    English
    102 years ago

    Please don’t fuck up my beloved fedora. Kind regards.

  • CyclohexaneM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Not surprised. A for-profit corporation wanting more money. Especially as we enroach further into late stage capitalism where corporations struggle to find more territory to profiteer from and squeeze more profit out of us.

    The era of free services being profitable is ending rapidly, and we see this across many areas in the world.

    • CyclohexaneM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 years ago

      You’re right. I should say “profit growth” which is what corporations look for. You can have solid growth, but unless it’s growing, they don’t care.

      • Sploosh the Water
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        Part of the Capitalist mythos for sure, “if you’re not growing, you’re dying.” There’s a rejection of the idea that you could reach a healthy equilibrium of size and just remain there.

        And because of the way the rest of the market works, it forces everybody to act like that or get beat out completely. Vicious feedback loops.

        • X3I
          link
          fedilink
          English
          42 years ago

          There’s a word for sth that grows unlimited and uncontrolled. Cancer.

        • @Tak@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          From an investor’s perspective why would you invest in OSS when you can invest in real estate. Why structuring an economy where investors decide everything is fucking terrible.

  • Flickertail
    link
    fedilink
    English
    42 years ago

    *sigh* Do I have to go abandon Fedora now too? I really hope they don’t pull a CentOS on that one

    • @hozl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      I highly doubt this would affect Fedora. Thankfully, it’s community driven and self-goverened so Red Hat execs can’t go and tell them what to do. (Though I don’t know how many ties the Fedora council had to Red Hat)

      • NaN
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        All of Fedora’s funding and IP comes from and belongs to Red Hat, this would be very persuasive. At least openSUSE has more sponsors than just SUSE.

    • unix_joe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      They already laid off the Fedora Program Manager back in May.

      IBM is closing off Red Hat to bleed it dry.

  • grey
    link
    fedilink
    English
    32 years ago

    I know this isn’t related but: Why do I see a completely different set of comments here when I’m logged in, as opposed to when I’m not?

    • 8rhn6t6s
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      I noticed this when I set my language settings in my lemmy profile.

    • Freeman
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      I’ve noticed much better post syncing on 0.18. 0.17.4 still relies websocket for syncing post comments and was constantly behind. I’m not mostly seeing that on instances that haven’t quite upgraded yet.

      Though if I was running a larger instance i probably wouldn’t upgrade quite yet until ironing out any kinks in a non-prod.

    • @UsernameLost@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      Sometimes comments won’t load for the post, it loads the comments for the last post you visited. Refreshing tends to fix it

    • ManeraKai
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Could be bc of how you set sorting comments in your account vs guest’s default.

  • ngoomie
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Wow what the hell, this is the first I’m hearing of this change. I use Rocky Linux for my server atm and I was thinking I liked it for server use quite a lot more than Fedora, but if they’re going to do this then I’m going to have to jump ship unfortunately. Maybe I’ll go back to Debian. Or even better, maybe I’ll try using Devuan in a prod server setup for once?

    I’m super not happy to have to jump ship again though when I JUST settled into something I’m comfortable with that works near perfectly well for my usecases, after multiple years of jumping around undecided.

    E: Although I did just read that statement from the Rocky Linux team, and maybe it’ll be fine? But I’m still gonna prepare to move just in case this fucks over the Rocky Linux ecosystem anyways

      • Domi
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        Is there even a Debian based distro that is up to date like Fedora, does not have snaps and does not have “Unstable” in its name?

          • @fulano@lemmy.eco.br
            link
            fedilink
            22 years ago

            Just checked their website and it seems like they’re using debian sid packages. What’s the difference between using siduction and plain debian sid, besides having a preconfigured desktop?

            • @BubblyMango@lemmy.wtf
              link
              fedilink
              32 years ago

              I never used siduction, im juat aware of its existence. I think they add some stability(=reliability) on top of sid and also keep updating packages during sid’s freezes. Dont quote me on this.

          • Domi
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            Not a huge fan of rolling releases but Ubuntu/Debian are too far behind, Fedora is a very nice middle ground.

            • @BubblyMango@lemmy.wtf
              link
              fedilink
              12 years ago

              My best middle ground is openSUSE tumbleweed. It is a rolling release but very reliable. Its not bleeding edge. It has snapshots which function like very small stable releases every few days insteqd of every package being updated individually. Every such snapshot has automatic testing. So all in all, very stable for a rolling release.

          • Domi
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            Probably the best choice but they have no KDE variant and are working on their own DE so things are probably changing very soon.

        • @bishopolis@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          12 years ago

          consider PCLinuxOS for a mageia (mandriva, conectiva and mandrake, both branches from RedHat pre-Enterprise Linux) descendant.

          • @addie@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            Mint isn’t super up-to-date, which if you want the cutting edge kernel/mesa for gaming is not great, but it’s a solid choice, and I 🥰 them for keeping all of the Snap shit out of core.

          • Domi
            link
            fedilink
            02 years ago

            Does Mint still use the Ubuntu packages?

            As @addie@feddit.uk mentioned they are way out of date for gaming on AMD, especially if you purchase a new GPU at some point.

            I switched from Ubuntu to Fedora when I got my 6900 XT because it would have taken another 2-3 months for Ubuntu to catch up to a kernel version where I could use it.

            • @Bene7rddso@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              12 years ago

              For most packages yes. You can also use Debian Edition, but if you want new packages that’s even worse

            • NaN
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 years ago

              Mint is also based on Ubuntu LTS, so it is way behind Fedora by the time another release comes out. I like it as a distro but it doesn’t meet the request.

  • @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22 years ago

    Users looking to run an EL-like linux that pre-dates RedHat’s derivation and meddling will want to look at PCLinuxOS .

    Its pedigree is mageia, so Mandrake and Conectiva.

    While it’s got a horrifically bad PXE install, and while that means Vagrants and templates are ghetto and thin on the ground, it’s otherwise a very fine OS with a wide compatibility range that RH couldn’t even match with this AppStream bullshit (ohai, /etc/alternatives).

  • AceFour
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22 years ago

    Maybe IBM can hire the Reddit CEO when he is fired to head up Red Hat. Seems like a perfect fit

  • @pezhore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22 years ago

    Jeff Geerling consistently has the most compatible, tested, updated, and well documented Ansible rolls out there. If I need to get some niche software installed and there is a geerlingguy role for it - I breathe a sigh of relief.

    If he is considering stopping support for RedHat and it’s various distros - that is massive.

    • @d3Xt3r@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      02 years ago

      I haven’t seen this in person so I can only speculate, but I bet they’ll only provide the sources as a tarball or something instead of a git repo, which will make it a PITA for anyone do actually do anything useful with it. I mean, you could potentially still build a full distro from it, but you wouldn’t be able to feasibly maintain it without the ability to do a sync and merge from upstream. So this way, Red Hat achieves their goal of being able to kill any spinoff distro, whilst still remaining compliant with the GPL.

      • NaN
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        It’s not a “they will.” Red Hat customers are able to download source rpms from the repository or the site, this has been the case for a very long time. It is possible to clone / sync the repository, this is how airgapped networks can still host their own.

      • The_Pete
        link
        fedilink
        English
        02 years ago

        Additionally, they have to release sources for the projects but not necessarily for things like the spec files or the rpms.

        Here’s the source for the kernel . . . .

        Thanks I can get that from kernel.org

        It’s the part that’s not GPL that’s the value add here.

    • @_s10e@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      02 years ago

      The plan is to give the source Code to paying customers. This is gpl-compliant.

      • @aport@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        The concern is that Red Hat terminates your account if you redistribute the source to another party. This feels like an additional restriction placed on the source code, which if it is, would indeed violate the GPL.

          • @Link@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            Serious concern and asshole move? Yes. Gpl violation? Not sure. You could argue you are not restricted to do whatever you want with the code you receive with a subscription. But if you share the code, they don’t want you as a customer anymore and won’t give you new code. I don’t know if the GPL allows that.

              • @Link@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                This clearly goes against the intention of the GPL.

                That I agree with. Maybe this will cause the FSF to create a 4th version.

        • @federico3@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Terminating a support contract, in itself, is not a GPL violation. The restrictions only affects the ability to receive future updates.

          Edit: Red Hat indeed claims that no GPL violation is happening, yet they inform their customers that sharing updates leads to contract termination, which clearly breaches the GPL at least in spirit: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2023/jun/23/rhel-gpl-analysis/

          • @aport@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            I think it depends on whether it’s considered an additional restriction on the recipient’s right to redistribute the software.

            Saying, “you can redistribute the software but you will face _____ penalty” seems like a gray area to me.

            • @federico3@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              22 years ago

              Context is important. It’s possible that the software is distributed without any warning like that and that the termination of the support contract is done without citing the redistribution of previous versions as a reason. OTOH if the customers could prove that there’s widespread knowledge of the retaliatory termination that could be equivalent to a (non-written) restriction that is indeed incompatible with the GPL

              • NaN
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                The warning is in the agreement every customer (and free developer account) signs to obtain access. They also mention they could sue you, although I think it is unrealistic they would do so just for redistribution.

              • @aport@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 years ago

                Yes more details would be good.

                According to Alma Linux

                “the way we understand it today, Red Hat’s user interface agreements indicate that re-publishing sources acquired through the customer portal would be a violation of those agreements.”

    • @Klicnik@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 years ago

      I have seen IBM do this multiple times. When they buy a company, they leave it pretty much alone for a year or two. Then they start to make their IBM changes to it, and change it enough to make anyone that knew the product before them hate it. IBM buying RedHat was the beginning of the end. I told my boss about it the day I read the news of the IBM buyout, “We need to stop using CentOS for any new systems.”

      • Ivan Jurišić
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        I’m in process replacing CentOS with Debian. Don’t see point to use close source.

  • @linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12 years ago

    Ohh, let’s see, pay for Redhat which will rot away without community support or use one of a dozen other distros. Sorry yum, it’s been fun.

    • @Nintendo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 years ago

      you’d be surprised how many comps use RHEL just for the “I’m completely fucked and I need corporate level support” or “we need a data center completely off the rack” or “we wanna throw money at this problem” or “we need somebody to sue or point our finger at if we get majorly fucked” or “we need an OS that meets compliance” use cases. many comps won’t just use some random community built OS to run their shit regardless of the community support. at the end of the day, many corporations with very complex requirements don’t have many legitimate data center OS options available.

  • Fedora
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12 years ago

    Are there any other distros that are foss and provide optional enterprise support? Enterprises deploy distros that offer guarantees, warranties, and compliance measures to ensure stability, reliability, and legal compliance. If I’d build a company, I’d feel a lot more comfortable with a distro that I can upgrade to an enterprise version when that’s necessary. But… now?

    I suppose there’s Ubuntu and SLES.