I'm not sure Red Hat sees it as a drama. It all seems perfectly simple to me. If you want to use RHEL, pay up. If you don't want to pay, go and use something else.

All this posturing and frothing at the mouth is not going to change anything. Red Hat is on a different course now. It's up to the community to decide if they're left behind or if this is just a new chapter unfolding?

I wonder if OpenELA will be around longer than UnitedLinux?

https://www.theregister.com/2023/08/14/oracle_suse_ciq_openela/

@dick_turpin I think the thing is that lots of places that ARE big RedHat shops run production on RedHat but dev and non-production is all community EL distros so they are using the same tools and standards as prod but without the faff and licencing which in a big organisation can be a nightmare. The whole thing stinks of IBM accountants trying to extract as much cash out of RHEL without understanding Linux or the community around it.

@tig @dick_turpin they could just run Centos Stream. RedHat has invested alot in the effort it takes to make RHEL so stable. If you need that, pay for it. Otherwise use Centos or whatever other distro. They are still abiding by licences and in many cases going beyond requirements.

@intrbiz Yeah, I don't understand why they dumped CentOS? The only answer I can see is IBM saw it as a direct competitor for RHEL, which they were planning to make a "Paid For" service. You can't exactly charge for RHEL and have effectively the same product running around the marketplace for free.

@tig

@dick_turpin @tig they didn't dump Centos, its more important than it ever was. Just upstream rather than downstream. Which can be better for a lot of situations.

@intrbiz I thought they pulled support?

@tig

@dick_turpin @intrbiz but if you wanted a fast moving distro in the RH world then Fedora is literally there... not sure of how taking out Centos was better. As ignoring dev machines etc you are knackering an upgrade path from centos to RHEL