On 06/20/2014 08:55 AM, Dag Wieers wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2014, Lamar Owen wrote:
>
>> On 06/20/2014 03:55 AM, Dag Wieers wrote:
>>>
>>>  It may have become a legal question now that the SRPMs are no longer
>>>  available from ftp.redhat.com. That in itself is an unwelcome change.
>>
>> It is an unfortunate change, yes, but I prefer to give Red Hat the
>> benefit of the doubt as far as motivations go, since they could close
>> it up completely like SuSE has with SLES and SLED (OpenSuSE is SuSE's
>> Fedora, so it doesn't count).  And SuSE is completely within its
>> rights under GPL to do how they are doing; this is not a jab against
>> SuSE, since SuSE has also done and is doing a lot of great work for
>> open source.  (Of course, since I haven't looked for publicly posted
>> source for SLES in a while, they may have posted it since I last
>> looked and I just don't know about it.)
>
> I am glad you agree that Red Hat now moving closer to what SuSE is doing
> is unfortunate and not welcomed by the community(*).
>
> (*) Where community in my definition excludes people on Red Hat's
> payroll ;-)
>

Although this discussion seems interesting, I see the same points being 
reiterated.  I don't see how any of this is going to change anything 
though.  RedHat and CentOS are moving forward whether we like it or not 
and the SL development team are doing what they can within those 
constraints.  If one needs all that integrity and vetting of the source, 
go fork over the money for a license.