SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL Archives

April 2014

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-DEVEL@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Tue, 15 Apr 2014 04:59:41 +0900
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
On Monday 14 April 2014 19:00:47 David Crick wrote:
> http://lwn.net/Articles/592723/
> 
> "So the goal for CentOS is to create a next-generation platform that
> is supported for a longer period of time than Fedora is. Ten years
> would be good, but most people just want something longer than 13
> months, he said, and *2–3 YEARS SEEMED TO BE A SWEET SPOT*."
> 
> (emphasis added by me).
> 
> Pertinent question: are SL users "most people" ?

Main-line CentOS would be positioned to compete with Ubuntu for desktop 
mindshare (and thus developer mindshare), and not really be in the server 
space. That is a critical area of failing competition for RedHat (no Fedora/RH 
Steam, for example). It also castrates the server-farm threat posed by CentOS. 
Smart move by RedHat.

Of course, if SL gets its sources through CentOS not RH directly then this 
could be a difficult move for downstream projects like SL (after all, this is 
"free as in gutter water"). I could easily imagine that SL might become the 
"LTS" CentOS spin or something similar (note that this is pure conjecture -- 
don't let that set the rumor-bugs off).

Anyway, there is too little concrete information to speculate much more than 
business interest. I feel as certain that the SL team will navigate this new 
terrain wisely as I am certain that neither RedHat nor CentOS wants to see SL 
be stranded.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2