On 10/01/14 00:16, jdow wrote:
> On 2014/01/09 16:00, Ian Murray wrote:
>> On 09/01/14 23:27, Ian Murray wrote:
>>> On 09/01/14 22:53, jdow wrote:
>>>> Ian, I suspect the SL staff position is more proper engineering with
>>>> it's concern about what could possibly go wrong than it is about
>>>> minimizing their work or compromising their main sponsor's needs. I
>>>> suspect that the SL staff position is also tempered with a healthy
>>>> dose of, "What do our customers want and need?"
>>> I didn't suggest otherwise. However, I could have sworn I read
>>> somewhere
>>> that Red Hat would stop release their source as SRPMs (which would have
>>> a direct impact on the build process of SL I assume), but I can't find
>>> that now. Maybe I mis-read that. I'll keep looking.
>>
>> Right, I have found it:
>>
>> http://community.redhat.com/centos-faq/
>>
>>
>>         Will this new relationship change the way CentOS obtains Red Hat
>>         Enterprise Linux source code?
>>
>> Yes. Going forward, the source code repository at git.centos.org will
>> replace
>> and obsolete the Red Hat Enterprise Linux source rpms on
>> ftp.redhat.com. Git
>> provides an attractive alternative to ftp because it saves time,
>> reduces human
>> error, and makes it easier for CentOS users to collaborate on and
>> build their
>> own distributions, including those of SIGs.
>>
>>
>> So, as I read it, SL will need to change whether it likes it or not,
>> unless RHEL
>> SRPMs will be available through other channels.
>
> I hope what they are doing is putting the RHEL sources into the Centos
> GIT
> repository and Centos then derives from the posted RHEL sources with its
> own sources OR that Centos simply becomes the source code distribution
> for
> RHEL.
>
> Don't forget that GPL means you must have the sources available when
> asked
> for. Therefore they have to be available to all chronologically before
> any
> potential Centos massaging might take place on those sources.

I have been struggling with this myself tbh. If RH adds a line in a GPL
program that says "Welcome to Red Hat", releases the binary as RHEL and
then modifies it for CentOS to read "Welcome to CentOS" and only
releases the source that says "Welcome to CentOS", then they are in
technical violation of the GPL, I would say. (IANAL).

>
> Pulling changes from git may be easier than pulling down the entire batch
> of SRPMs, too. It may well simplify the SL process.
Of course, but it's still a change to SL's build, which was my point. (I
think :) )

Let's not forget the motivation here (IMHO): To stuff Oracle right up.
So I suspect it's going to be either harder or impossible to rebuild
RHEL without going via CentOS. This is why it might be batter to embrace
the CentOS official variant option. I don't know how this will pan out

I ought to mention, btw, if you happen to work for Oracle, please feel
free to feel as spongy as you like. :p


>
> {^_^}