On 4/3/21 2:57 PM, Yasha Karant wrote:
> Is IBM RH required under the GPL and Linux licenses to release without 
> charge the fully buildable source code for whatever Linux derivatives 
> IBM RH provides under binary executable installable license for fee?
The only source that has to be released at all is source covered by 
licenses that require it.  There are many packages in the EL 
distributions under licenses that do not require it.  I'm not going to 
do all of the legwork for you on this, but a quick repoquery (found in 
package "yum-utils"):

# repoquery --queryformat "%{license}"|sort|uniq|wc -l
Last metadata expiration check: 0:48:27 ago on Mon 05 Apr 2021 09:19:33 
AM EDT.
758
#

Narrowing down the repositories to just the core ones (BaseOS, 
AppStream, PowerTools), and just looking at the numbers of packages by 
%{name}, using a simple grep for either the string GPL or the string BSD 
in the %{license} tag:
GPL: 4,191
BSD: 1,285
Total: 6,383
Neither GPL nor BSD license: 1,608 (yes, that's more than expected, 
because there are 701 packages where both the strings GPL and BSD are 
found in the %{license} string; run:

repoquery --repo BaseOS --repo AppStream --repo PowerTools --queryformat 
"%{license} %{name}"|grep BSD|grep GPL

to find out which ones).

Number of unique licenses in these repositories: 444 (302 are GPL or 
similar, 118 are BSD or similar).

> ... Is there going to be a new ELC (Enterprise Linux Clone) list, ...

I would imagine each rebuild would have its own unique communications 
channels, unless someone has the resources and is willing to put 
together a combined list.

> Will EPEL, ElRepo, etc., continue to support AL8 with the various 
> package, drivers, and utilities that base EL8 "lacks"? 

As of right now, both EPEL and ELrepo specifically support RHEL. CentOS 
and other rebuild support from either is purely determined by how close 
to RHEL the rebuild is.