document/TranslateProject
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject.git synced 2024-12-23 21:20:42 +08:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

ATRP

Browse Source 
@wxy
https://linux.cn/article-15961-1.html
This commit is contained in:
Xingyu Wang 2023-07-02 17:21:27 +08:00
parent db99d21005
commit 03143940fd
2 changed files with 261 additions and 261 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

261
published/20230701.0 ⭐️⭐️ The Suicide Attempt by Red Hat [Opinion].md Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,261 @@
[#]: subject: "The Suicide Attempt by Red Hat [Opinion]"
[#]: via: "https://news.itsfoss.com/red-hat-fiasco/"
[#]: author: "Community https://news.itsfoss.com/author/team/"
[#]: collector: "lkxed"
[#]: translator: "ChatGPT"
[#]: reviewer: "wxy"
[#]: publisher: "wxy"
[#]: url: "https://linux.cn/article-15961-1.html"
观点：红帽公司的自杀企图
======
> 红帽公司将其源代码放在付费墙后面的最新决定，今天可能会对其直接竞争对手造成一定伤害，但对红帽公司自身而言，这将对之后产生负面影响。
![红帽关闭源代码][1]
基于我对 RHEL 和其他红帽产品的热爱，我不得不现在表达一些严厉的看法。**我**之所以这样做，是因为我希望 RHEL [及/或其克隆版] 对每个人都是 *可获得的*。
请原谅这次我用词有些激烈，因为我从内心不希望 RHEL 成为 **对业余爱好者不可及** 的产品。免费的 RHEL 开发者许可证只是转移话题而已，相比于 **真正的 RHEL 克隆版存在的时候**，它削弱了 **广大动手爱好者社区** 的热情。
> 🗒️ 对于我的使用场景来说，使用免费订阅的 RHEL 使我感到满意。实际上，我正在使用的就是免费订阅。本文是关于如果保持这种状态会对 RHEL 产生怎样的影响。
### 快速回顾：事情是如何走到这一步的
我相信你现在都已经知道为什么红帽公司最近频频出现在新闻中：
但是，如果你对正在发生的事情一无所知，让我给你一个快速时间线的指引，帮助你理解：
1. 红帽公司拥有一个**出色**的 Linux 发行版，名为 <ruby>红帽企业 Linux<rt>Red Hat Enterprise Linux</rt></ruby>（RHEL），支持周期长达 **10** 年。
2. 与其他任何 Linux 发行版一样，用于构建 RHEL（或 RHEL 的 **克隆版**）的源代码是公开可用的。
3. CentOS 利用上述源代码，去除商标，并创建了一个几乎 1 比 1 的 RHEL 拷贝。（我说“几乎”是因为 RHEL 的商标 **必须** 被删除。）
4. 那些不愿意支付费用只是为了第一次尝试 RHEL 的爱好者社区，现在可以使用 CentOS 来看看是否喜欢它。
5. 这个人中的一部分人随后向他们的高层管理人员介绍了 RHEL 及其 **通过 CentOS 初步体验** 到的卓越表现，他们很可能转向在 RHEL 上支持他们的产品或在部署中使用 RHEL。
6. 由于 CentOS 是免费的，爱好者社区得以扩大。像 [Jeff Geerling][2] 这样的人使用 CentOS 来教授对 **扮演系统管理员感兴趣** 的新一代爱好者，让他们了解他的 [开源存储库][3] 中诸如 Ansible 之类的很棒的内容。
7. CentOS 的二进制文件在 RHEL 更新后几周才发布。因此，[红帽收购了 CentOS][4]，以确保 CentOS 不会落后于 RHEL 的更新。
8. 几年后，[CentOS Stream][5] 的惨淡出场，导致了 CentOS 的消亡。
9. [Rocky Linux][6] 和 [Alma Linux][7] 出现填补了 CentOS 留下的空白。它们使用的是公开可用的 RHEL 源代码。
10. 红帽公司开始限制源代码的访问，只允许其付费客户以及任何拥有免费的开发者订阅的人访问。
> 📋 我特意没有提到 IBM 收购红帽的事情，因为如果红帽的某个人有勇气在 [官方场合][9] 公开说，“**只是简单地重建代码，没有增加价值或以任何方式改变代码，对开源公司来说都是真正的威胁。**”，他们肯定也可以直承 IBM 参与了这些决定。但几乎每个红帽员工都公开否认了这种指责。所以我也不相信 IBM 自己搬起石头砸自己的脚。但你可以根据自己的心来决定是否相信。
> 不，当我说 IBM 可能没有参与这个决定时，我并不是在讽刺。他们 **有可能参与**，但我不这么认为。
### 亲爱的红帽公司，你刚刚做了什么？
你向社区提供一款免费的产品（CentOS）。然后你在提供这个免费产品的过程中（CentOS）改变它的的支持周期，并将其“替代品”（CentOS Stream）用作你闪亮的企业产品（RHEL）的“测试场”。
然后那些水蛭们拿起你闪亮产品的源代码，创建了一个 CentOS 的接替者（Rocky Linux 和 Alma Linux）。你不喜欢这样，所以对它们进行了 “软付费墙” 的限制。
现在，虽然 **你有权利这样做**（因为你从为 RHEL 提供支持而不是 RHEL 本身赚钱），但我会解释为什么这对 **你自己来说** 是一个糟糕的举动。
- **问题：** RHEL 在企业环境中为什么如此受欢迎？
- **答案：** CentOS ~~Stream~~。
- **问题：** 在线教程用什么来教授 RHEL？
- **答案：** CentOS ~~Stream~~。
- **问题：** 那些跟随上述在线教程的学习者用什么来学习 RHEL？
- **答案：** CentOS ~~Stream~~。
- **问题：** 当这些学生成为老师时，他们会向询问如何入门 Linux 系统管理员的人推荐什么？
- **答案：** CentOS ~~Stream~~。
- **问题：** 如果有人愿意购买 RHEL 的许可证，但因为没有公开的软件仓库而犹豫不决，他们会用什么？
- **答案：** CentOS ~~Stream~~。
简而言之，如果红帽公司继续对 RHEL 的克隆产品制造麻烦，以下是可能出现的情况：
- 许多参与企业部署的客户和专业人士将考虑放弃 RHEL，并且不再对其提供支持。
- 新用户将开始考虑使用 **Ubuntu、Debian、openSUSE** 或其他长期存在的替代产品。
- 大学和 IT 培训也将转向替代方案，例如 Ubuntu 或 openSUSE，而不再纠结于 RHEL 克隆、CentOS Stream 和 Fedora 之间。
此外，根据他们的 [FAQ][10]，小型企业和大学无法使用免费的红帽开发者订阅：
> 无费用的、无支持的红帽开发者订阅是为个人和个人帐户设计的。
**除非红帽公司友好对待 RHEL 克隆产品，否则我无法再看到这个生态系统中会有任何新的参与者了。** 这实在令人沮丧，因为 RHEL 是一款出色的产品。是的，它可能不像 Fedora 那样前沿，但是使用起来仍然很有乐趣！
我会引用 Brian Stevens 的 [一句话][11] 来阐述观点：
> 我们的信仰核心是，当有共同目标或问题的人们可以自由地联结和合作时，他们汇集起来的创新可以改变世界。我们相信开源的开发过程能够产生更好的代码，而用户社区会创造出一个让代码具有影响力的受众。
RHEL 是一款企业级发行版，因此红帽公司几乎不会致力于为在树莓派上运行 RHEL 提供支持。猜猜是哪些发行版为树莓派提供了企业级 Linux 镜像。提示一下，它们是 [Rocky Linux][12] 和 [Alma Linux][13]。我敢打赌，红帽公司并没有统计出有多少人使用 RHEL 是因为他们先在树莓派上尝试使用 Rocky/Alma Linux，然后转而使用 RHEL。**我就是其中之一**（使用免费的 RHEL 许可证，也就那点价值）。
那么对于 RHEL 来说，这意味着什么？我不是 **先知**（此处双关 “Oracle”，哈哈！），所以无法预测 RHEL 的未来。
我远不是一个“引领潮流者”，也不知道有多少人受到我 [关于 Podman 的报道][14] 的积极影响。尝试使用 Podman 并非没有原因。我先在 Fedora 上试用，然后通过使用 Rocky Linux 在一个“生产级”环境中进行 **大量实验**，最后在 RHEL 上部署了一些我自己的服务。这并不是说“如果我没有这么做，其他人就不会这样做”，但你不能否认，从我和 **许多其他人** 这样的多方共同努力中产生的内容所带来的 **影响**。顺便说一下，是我促使 [Abhishek][15] 去报道 Podman，而不是相反。
当然，上述提到的“贡献”有些可能对红帽公司没有帮助，但它们对于 **红帽公司的客户群体** 来说是有帮助的。
### 所以，我们应该感到担忧吗？也是，也不是。
红帽公司做出的决定，从商业角度来看是有道理的。但也不完全是。从短期目标来看是有道理的，但从长期来看则不然。
红帽公司作为一家自豪地向上游贡献的公司，他们不会停止继续贡献。即使通过“软付费墙”来限制 RHEL 的代码，**红帽公司仍将继续向上游贡献**。红帽公司将继续在 [新的][16] [发展][17] 上 [进行][18] [创新][19]。
他们只是不再像以前那样将 RHEL 的“秘密配方”（在你期望的意义上）开放了。这个秘密的配方本身并不是“专有的”。红帽在 RHEL 中提供的几乎所有东西都是开源的。
他们的秘密在于 **将补丁向后移植到 RHEL 稳定包** 中。将这些补丁仅提供给 RHEL 的客户，这是一个非常公平的 **商业决策**。这些补丁也可以公开用于同一软件包的 **不同版本**。将补丁应用于使“旧版本”软件包保持最新状态的任务非常困难。
**所以，我理解他们为什么做出这个决定。**
**红帽并没有将 RHEL 变为闭源**（至少从技术上来说）。
红帽依然是一家出色的公司，其拥有经过验证的开源产品组合。我每天都在使用其中一些产品，比如：**在树莓派 4 上运行 RHEL（[是的，这是可能的！][20]）、（无需 root 的）Podman、Cockpit、Ansible、systemd 等等！**
### 以下你应该感到担忧的原因
如果 RHEL 不是自由提供的 —— 不是指免费，而是像 Debian、Ubuntu 甚至 Fedora 那样无需账户即可下载 —— 那么对于想要进入企业 Linux 生态系统的新人来说，他们的数量将继续减少。我认为是这样……
如果这个数量减少了，实际上推荐企业使用和支付 RHEL 的人数也会减少。你知道这会引发什么样的循环。
- 对 RHEL 感兴趣的新人变少 → 购买的 RHEL 订阅变少
- 红帽的收入减少 → 对上游项目的贡献减少（如 systemd、Podman、Linux 内核、GNOME、Wayland、英伟达合作等）
- 最终 → Linux 生态系统的总体改进变少
当然，红帽并不是唯一向 Linux 生态系统做出贡献的公司，但你不能否认它对推动生态系统全面向前 **流动** 所产生的巨大影响！
### 我对红帽声明的回应
> ✋ 我并不是在攻击 Mike McGrath。这只是对他的陈述的直接回应。我相信作为一个 RHEL 用户，我有权利表达自己的观点，因为我非常喜欢它，以至于通过树莓派 4B 上的 RHEL 部署了个人博客。
除非另有说明，以下所有引文均摘自 [这篇博文][21]。
#### 引文 1
> 我感觉大部分对我们近期对下游源代码的决策所引发的愤怒，大部分来自 **那些不愿意为 RHEL 所付出时间、精力和资源买单的人**，或者那些想要将其重新打包以谋取自己利益的人。
是的，这完全公平，但我要一直强调这一点，直到你意识到，如果没有广大社区在 CentOS 及其后续产品上的培训，RHEL 就什么都不是。
**现在的 IT 专业人员中包括曾经在这个群体中的人，而你现在给他们打上了 “那些不愿意为所付出时间...”的标签。** 😒
通过展示这样的立场，你会让更少的人接触企业级 Linux，并且之后使用 RHEL 的人数显著减少。
#### 引文 2
> 我们必须为从事这项工作的人支付报酬 —— 那些在漫长的工作时间和夜晚中辛勤工作、相信开源价值观的热情贡献者。简单地将这些个人产生的代码重新打包并原样转售，而没有增加任何价值，会导致这个开源软件的生产不可持续。这包括关键的向后移植工作和 [上游正在开发的未来功能和技术][22]。如果这项工作变得不可持续，它将停止，这对任何人来说都不好。
这不仅是一个完全合理的观点，而且也是残酷的现实。开源软件的资金不足。当任何人都可以无需付出实际回报就使用你的产品时，为开源软件筹集资金也变得非常困难。
但是，如果社区没有免费获得 RHEL（在限制源代码之前），那么它可能不会像今天这样取得巨大的成功。社区通过自由探索 RHEL，并使其成为更为壮大。
我不是让红帽公司做慈善事业，只是白白地免费提供。我希望红帽公司有足够的资金来改进上游。但是应该在 **某个地方** 找到一种折中方案。
再次强调，免费订阅并不等同于 RHEL 的克隆。当然，我写过关于如何 [免费获取红帽企业版 Linux][23] 的文章。然而，这并不是相同的精神。我在这里 [引用 Jeff Geerling 的话][24]:
> “不，请不要说‘但你可以使用你的红帽开发者订阅！’我在 Debian、Ubuntu、Arch 等系统上可以不使用它。你明白我的意思。”
#### 引文 3
> 最近，我们已经确定，拥有一个下游的重构者没有价值。
绝对是有价值的！我不会在这里重复我是如何通过 RHEL 的重构版本进入 RHEL 的这一点。
Windows 之所以受欢迎，只是因为微软允许盗版存在（和更便宜的许可证密钥）。
如果他们加强了控制，没有一个家庭会在 Vista 的继任者上花一分钱。我并不是要将 Vista（一款灾难性的操作系统）与 RHEL 进行比较，但这个类比大多数人应该有共鸣，你可以想想没有得到 Windows 许可证退款时的那种不甘。
#### 引文 4
> 通常公认的观点是，这些免费重构就是产生 RHEL 专家并转化为销售的渠道，这并不是现实情况。我希望我们生活在那样的世界，但实际情况并非如此。相反，我们发现了一群用户，其中许多用户属于大型或非常大型的 IT 组织，他们希望获得 RHEL 的稳定性、周期和硬件生态系统，而无需实际支持维护者、工程师、编写人员和许多其他角色。
**...你确定吗？** 😮
当然，从免费用户转化为 RHEL 客户的转化率可能不是很高，但我敢打赌，这个比例不会低于 30%。如果你坚持这样做，新客户的数量将不到当前新“注册”用户的 10%。
**对于利用免费的 RHEL 开发者许可证也可以提出同样的论点。**对于那些不愿意支付 RHEL 费用的人来说，使用临时电子邮件 ID 创建新的红帽账户以便利用免费的开发者订阅是一项不容忽视的任务。
当我们谈论转化率时，有多少专业人士正是使用 RHEL 的克隆版本进行内部产品开发（以便与 RHEL 进行适配），但实际上为使用 RHEL 的客户提供支持呢？
**你如何衡量由第三方支持提供给客户的价值？** **你不能**，它不是一种可以衡量的有形物质。
我想扯远了，但这确实是真实发生的事件。我目前所使用的 [小镇当地的] ISP 使用 RHEL 对用户进行身份验证，因为他从一个向他出租互联网线路的公司获得了一个可以在 ~~CentOS 和~~ RHEL 上部署的身份验证产品。
猜猜他们在内部是用什么开发来与 RHEL 对接？ 😊
#### 引文 5
> 仅仅是重建代码，不添加价值，也不以任何方式进行更改，对开源公司来说是一个真正的威胁。这是对开源的真正威胁，这可能将开源重新变成只有业余爱好者和黑客参与的活动。
那么像 Rocky Linux 和 Alma Linux 这样的 RHEL 克隆做的工作还不够重要，不足以与“仅仅重建代码，**不添加价值，也不以任何方式进行更改**”相区分吗？
> 💡 我不知道如何更礼貌地重新表述这句话，所以请不要往心里去。这来自于对 RHEL 的热爱，而不是对红帽（管理层）的误导性愤怒。
- [Rocky Linux][25] 和 [Alma Linux][26] 都为树莓派提供镜像，这使得在沉浸于企业级 Linux 这个隐喻的幸福海洋之前，可以更容易、更便宜地试水。
- Alma Linux 有一个名为 [Elevate][27] 的工具，允许 **所有用户**（这显然包括 RHEL，甚至是 Alma 的“竞争对手” Rocky Linux）升级到主要版本（例如从 7.x 到 8.x，等等）。我相信红帽公司的客户会喜欢这样的工具。
- Rocky Linux 有一个名为 [Peridot][28] 的构建工具。它使任何人都可以拥有一个**自定义构建的 RHEL**。这个构建可以基于 Rocky Linux，或者甚至可以是公司的内部 RHEL 克隆，以防止供应链攻击。
这个回答也涉及到前面引用中的以下子引用：
> 仅仅将这些个人创造的代码重新打包，并原样转售，而不添加任何价值，会导致这个开源软件的生产无法持续下去。
它们正在为企业 Linux 生态系统增加价值，*而不是直接为 RHEL* 增加价值。
### 关于 CentOS Stream……
CentOS Stream 是一个奇怪的产品。在任何意义都不算糟糕（至少我个人是这么认为的），但是很奇怪。它与 RHEL 在以下关键方面存在差异，其中之一肯定会成为某些人的绝对禁忌：
- 它是 RHEL 的测试组，这使得对于 RHEL 和特别兴趣小组（SIG）来说更加便利，但是对于你的使用情况而言，可能会有帮助，也可能没有。
- CentOS Stream 不使用数字版本号的命名方案。这样一个微小的变化，在 CentOS Stream 上的测试时，可能会破坏为 RHEL 设计的脚本。同样的情况也可能出现在安全更新方面，正如 [一位 Twitter 用户所描述的][29]。
- 正如我之前提到的，安全修复在 CentOS Stream 上发布较晚。虽然这可能有一些原因，但对于依靠 RHEL 克隆版本的小企业来说，并没有帮助，因为它们仍然容易受到威胁。
### 结论
现在 CentOS Stream 已经存在，RHEL 的 **开发** 比以往更加开放。但巧合的是，**RHEL 的源代码** 却被置于一个软性付费墙之后，受制于 [Red Hat 的最终用户许可协议（EULA）][30]。
目前这可能对红帽有所帮助。但如果保持这种立场，甚至不需要采取其他措施打击 RHEL 克隆产品，我相信围绕企业级 Linux 的用户、开发者和支持社区将会逐渐衰落...
我认为从长远来看，这将会伤害到红帽，因为随着周围的社区消亡，只有疲惫不堪的 IT 专业人员（意思是：**被迫使用它的人，就像使用 Oracle 产品一样**）才会继续使用 RHEL，甚至更糟糕的是，使用 Oracle Linux。
我在这里并不是在抨击红帽的员工。而是希望让你知道，如果继续这样发展下去，热爱 RHEL 的社区将会消亡。
我不愿意看到那种局面 😔
我真心地祝愿红帽在推动 Linux 生态系统前进方面一切顺利！真心的 ❤️
> ✍️ 此观点来自 Pratham Patel，一位热爱红帽的开源爱好者和探索者。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
via: https://news.itsfoss.com/red-hat-fiasco/
作者：[Pratham Patel][a]
选题：[lkxed][b]
译者：ChatGPT
校对：[wxy](https://github.com/wxy)
本文由 [LCTT](https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject) 原创编译，[Linux中国](https://linux.cn/) 荣誉推出
[a]: https://news.itsfoss.com/author/team/
[b]: https://github.com/lkxed/
[1]: https://news.itsfoss.com/content/images/size/w1304/2023/07/suicide-attempt-redhat.png
[2]: https://www.jeffgeerling.com:443/
[3]: https://github.com:443/geerlingguy?tab=repositories&q=ansible&type=&language=&sort=
[4]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-and-centos-join-forces
[5]: https://itsfoss.com:443/centos-stream-faq/
[6]: https://rockylinux.org:443/about
[7]: https://almalinux.org:443/blog/introducing-almalinux-beta-a-community-driven-replacement-for-centos/
[8]: https://news.itsfoss.com/red-hat-restricts-source-code/
[9]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/blog/red-hats-commitment-open-source-response-gitcentosorg-changes
[10]: https://developers.redhat.com:443/articles/faqs-no-cost-red-hat-enterprise-linux
[11]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-and-centos-join-forces
[12]: https://rockylinux.org:443/alternative-images/
[13]: https://almalinux.org:443/blog/almalinux-for-raspberry-pi-updates-october-2021/
[14]: https://linuxhandbook.com:443/tag/podman/
[15]: https://itsfoss.com:443/team/
[16]: https://fedoramagazine.org:443/announcing-the-display-hdr-hackfest/
[17]: https://news.itsfoss.com/red-hat-accessibility-gnome/
[18]: https://developer.nvidia.com:443/blog/nvidia-releases-open-source-gpu-kernel-modules/
[19]: https://lists.fedoraproject.org:443/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/IXNTPGKHWTW7H7XVMZICSJRUDOHO2KJC/
[20]: https://nitter.net:443/thefossguy/status/1527935333899583488
[21]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/blog/red-hats-commitment-open-source-response-gitcentosorg-changes
[22]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/about/our-community-contributions
[23]: https://linuxhandbook.com:443/get-red-hat-linux-free/
[24]: https://www.jeffgeerling.com:443/blog/2023/dear-red-hat-are-you-dumb
[25]: https://rockylinux.org:443/alternative-images/
[26]: https://almalinux.org:443/blog/almalinux-for-raspberry-pi-updates-october-2021/
[27]: https://almalinux.org:443/elevate/
[28]: https://github.com:443/rocky-linux/peridot
[29]: https://nitter.net:443/opdroid1234/status/1672067314789888000
[30]: https://www.jeffgeerling.com:443/blog/2023/gplv2-red-hat-and-you

261
sources/talk/20230701.0 ⭐️⭐️ The Suicide Attempt by Red Hat [Opinion].md
View File

@ -1,261 +0,0 @@
[#]: subject: "The Suicide Attempt by Red Hat [Opinion]"
[#]: via: "https://news.itsfoss.com/red-hat-fiasco/"
[#]: author: "Community https://news.itsfoss.com/author/team/"
[#]: collector: "lkxed"
[#]: translator: " "
[#]: reviewer: " "
[#]: publisher: " "
[#]: url: " "
The Suicide Attempt by Red Hat [Opinion]
======
The latest decision to put Red Hat's source code behind a paywall may hurt its direct competitors today but it will negatively impact Red Hat tomorrow.
![Red Hat close source][1]
I have been forced to be a bit harsh right now based on how much I love RHEL and other Red Hat products. **I**t is because I want RHEL** [and/or its clones] **to be _accessible_ to everyone**.
Excuse my tone this time because my heart doesn't want RHEL to be **inaccessible to hobbyists**. The free RHEL developer license is just whataboutism and dilutes the enthusiasm felt by the **broader hobbyists' and tinkerers' community** compared to when **true RHEL clones existed**.
> 🗒️ I, with my use case, am happy using RHEL with the free subscription. In fact, that's what I'm using right now. This article is about what happens_**to**_RHEL if this is maintained.
### A Quick Recap of the Events That Led to This
I'm sure you all know by now why Red Hat has been in the news recently:
But, if you have no idea what's going on, lemme give you pointers to a quick timeline that should help you understand:
- Red Hat has an **excellent** Linux distribution called Red Hat Enterprise Linux with a support cycle of **10 **years**.
- Like any other Linux distribution, the source code used to build RHEL (or a __clone__ of RHEL) was available publicly.
- CentOS came into existence by taking the aforementioned source, removing trademarks, and creating an almost 1-to-1 copy of RHEL. (I say __almost__ because RHEL trademarks _**need**_ to be removed.)
- The enthusiast community--that didn't bother paying fees __just to try out RHEL for the first time__--can now use CentOS to see if they like it.
- A subset of people from that group then inform their higher management about RHEL and how good it is **based on their** _**initial**_ **experience with CentOS** and most likely switch to cater to either supporting their products on RHEL or using RHEL for their deployments.
- The enthusiast community grows because CentOS is free. People like [Jeff Geerling][2] use CentOS to teach up-and-coming enthusiasts interested in __cosplaying as a sysadmin__ about awesome stuff like Ansible with [his **open source repositories**][3].
- CentOS's binaries were released a few weeks **after** RHEL's updates. So [Red Hat acquired CentOS][4] to ensure that CentOS didn't lag behind RHEL's updates.
- A few years later the [CentOS Stream][5] fiasco happened, killing CentOS.
- [Rocky Linux][6] and [Alma Linux][7] come up to fill the void left by CentOS. They use the RHEL's source which is publicly available.
- Red Hat [starts restricting the source code][8] to its customers and anyone else with a free developer subscription.
> 📋 I specifically didn't mention IBM buying Red Hat because, if someone from Red Hat has the guts to publicly say,**"Simply rebuilding code, without adding value or changing it in any way, represents a real threat to open source companies everywhere."**in an[official capacity][9], they can also be trusted to be blunt about IBM's involvement in these decisions. But almost every Red Hat employee has publicly denied this accusation. Therefore, I don't believe IBM shot themselves in their foot either. But you are free to believe what your heart says.
>
> And no, I'm not being sarcastic when I say IBM is probably not involved in this decision. They__may be__, but I don't think so.
### Dear Red Hat, What Did You Just Do?
You offer a product to the community __for free__ (CentOS). Then you switch the support window of that free product mid-cycle (CentOS) and use its "alternative" (CentOS Stream) as a **testing ground** for your shiny, enterprise product (RHEL).
The leeches then take the source code of your shiny product and create a successor to CentOS (Rocky Linux and Alma Linux). You don't like that so you "soft-paywall" them.
Now while **you are well within your rights to do so** (because you earn money from providing support for RHEL and not from RHEL itself), I'll explain why this is a bad move **for yourself**.
- **Question:** Why is RHEL so popular in enterprise environments?
- **Answer:** CentOS ~~Stream~~.
- **Question:** What did online tutorials use to teach about RHEL?
- **Answer:** CentOS ~~Stream~~.
- **Question:** What do the followers of said online tutorials use to learn about RHEL?
- **Answer:** CentOS ~~Stream~~.
- **Question:** When said student becomes a teacher, what will they recommend to someone who asks how to get started as a Linux sysadmin?
- **Answer:** CentOS ~~Stream~~.
- **Question:** If someone is willing to pay for RHEL's license but is hesitant to use it because of non-public public software repository, what will they use?
- **Answer:** CentOS ~~Stream~~.
In a nutshell, if Red Hat continues to cause trouble for RHEL clones, here's what you can expect:
- Many customers and professionals helping with enterprise deployments will consider abandoning RHEL and not supporting it.
- New users will start considering **Ubuntu, Debian, openSUSE** or something else which is there to stay.
- Universities/IT Courses will also switch to replacements like Ubuntu or openSUSE instead of dabbling between RHEL clones, CentOS Stream, and Fedora.
Moreover, small businesses and universities cannot use the free Red Hat Developer Subscription as per their [FAQ][10]:
> The no-cost self-supported Red Hat Developer Subscription for Individuals is designed for individuals and personal accounts.
_**Unless Red Hat is friendly towards RHEL clones, I don't see any newcomers in this ecosystem anymore.**_ And, this is just depressing, as RHEL is a fantastic product. Yes, it's not as bleeding edge as even Fedora, but man it is still fun to use!
I will let this [quote from Brian Stevens][11] be here...
> It is core to our beliefs that when people who share goals or problems are free to connect and work together, their pooled innovations can change the world. We believe the open source development process produces better code, and a community of users creates an audience that makes code impactful.
RHEL is an enterprise distribution so Red Hat will almost never work at providing support for running RHEL on Raspberry Pi. Guess which distributions provide EL images for Raspberry Pis. Hint, it is [Rocky Linux][12] and [Alma Linux][13]. I bet Red Hat doesn't have a number on how many people are using RHEL because they tried it out on their Raspberry Pi first with Rocky/Alma Linux and then switched to RHEL. __I'm one of them.__ (With the free RHEL license, for what its worth.)
So what does this mean for RHEL? I'm not an __Oracle__ (haha!) so I can't predict the future for RHEL.
I am far from a "trend setter" and I don't know how many people have been positively influenced by my [Podman coverage][14]. Trying out Podman didn't come out of the blue. I did that by dipping my toes on Fedora first, then **experimented a lot** with a "production-grade" environment by using Rocky Linux and then finally deployed some of my own services on RHEL. Not to say "If I didn't do it, no one would have", but you can't deny the __impact__ by making accessible content like this, from me and **many others**. FYI, I prompted [Abhishek][15] to cover Podman, not the other way around.
Sure, some of the above mentioned "contributions" may not help Red Hat, but it helps __whom Red Hat serves as their customers__.
### So, Should We Be Worried? Yes, and No.
**The decision that Red Hat has taken, does make sense as a business.** But it also doesn't. It makes sense for short term goals. Not in the long term.
Red Hat, as a company that proudly contributes back to its upstream – that will never stop. Even by "soft-paywalling" RHEL code, **Red Hat will continue contributing to the upstream.** Red Hat will continue [innovating][16][on][17][new][18][developments][19].
They just won't keep their RHEL __secret sauce__ “open” (in the sense that you expect it to be) anymore. And this secret sauce is nothing “proprietary” in itself. Almost everything that Red Hat offers in RHEL is open source.
Their secret sauce is with __backporting patches to RHEL's stable packages__. And it is a completely fair __business decision__ to provide these patches--which are publicly available for a __different version__ of the same package – to only RHEL customers. The task of applying patches to keep an “older version” of a package up-to-date is very difficult.
_**So, I do understand why they made this decision.**_
**Red Hat is NOT close sourcing RHEL** (at least technically).
Red Hat is still an excellent company that has a proven open-source portfolio. I use some of these products on a day-to-day basis like: __RHEL on the Raspberry Pi 4 (__[__yes, it's possible!__][20]__), [Rootless] Podman, Cockpit, Ansible, systemd, and many more!__
### Here's Why You Should Worry
If RHEL isn't freely available--not __free of cost__, but accessible to download like Debian, Ubuntu and even Fedora; without an account – the newcomers looking at being introduced to the enterprise Linux ecosystem will keep on decreasing in numbers. I think so...
If that number goes down, the people who do actually recommend RHEL in business to use and pay for it will go down too. And you know what loop this triggers.
- Fewer newcomers interested in RHEL → Less RHEL subscriptions purchased
- Less revenue for Red Hat → Fewer Red Hat contributions to Upstreams (__systemd, Podman, Linux Kernel, Guh-NOME, Wayland, Nvidia collaboration, etc.)__
- Finally, → Fewer improvements to the Linux ecosystem in general
Sure, Red Hat isn't the only company contributing back to the Linux ecosystem, but you can't deny its monstrous impact on pushing the ecosystem full __stream__ ahead!
### My Response to Red Hat Statements
> ✋ I'm not attacking Mike McGarth. This is just a direct response to his statements. I believe that I have the right to communicate my point of view as an RHEL user who ended up loving it so much as to deploy his personal blog via RHEL from his Raspberry Pi 4B.
Unless specified otherwise, all the following quotes are taken from [this blog post][21].
#### Quote 1
> I feel that much of the anger from our recent decision around the downstream sources comes from either those who do not want to pay for the time, effort and resources going into RHEL or those who want to repackage it for their own profit.
Yes, that's completely fair, but again, I'll harp on this point until you realize that RHEL is nothing without the community at large that has been **trained on CentOS and its successors alike**.
**The current IT professionals include people who once were in the group which you now tag under the umbrella** of “__either those who do not want to pay for the time....__".😒
By displaying such a stance, you are making sure that there are significantly less number of people who are introduced to the enterprise Linux, and later work with RHEL.
#### Quote 2
> We have to pay the people to do that work — those passionate contributors grinding through those long hours and nights who believe in open source values. Simply repackaging the code that these individuals produce and reselling it as is, with no value added, makes the production of this open source software unsustainable. That includes critical backporting work and [future features and technologies under development upstream.][22] If that work becomes unsustainable, it will stop, and that's not good for anyone.
This is not only a perfectly reasonable take, but it is also the harsh reality. Open source is underfunded. It is also severely hard to raise funding for open source when anybody can just use your product without giving practically anything in return.
But, if the community did not get RHEL for free (before restricting the source code), it may not have been a huge success as it is today. The community explored RHEL and made it a bigger player because it is free.
I'm not asking Red Hat to be a charity and just give it away. I want Red Hat to have more than enough funding to spend it on improving upstream. But there should be a middle ground __somewhere__.
Again, the free subscription is not an equivalent for a RHEL clone. Sure, I have written about [__how to get Red Hat Enterprise Linux for free__][23]. However, it's not the same spirit. I'll [quote Jeff Geerling][24] here:
> And no, please don't post "but you can use your Red Hat Developer Subscription!" I don't have to with Debian. Or Ubuntu. Or Arch. Or... you get the point.
#### Quote 3
> More recently, we have determined that there isn’t value in having a downstream rebuilder.
There most definitely is! I won't repeat myself here about how the RHEL rebuilds are the entry point for nerds like me into RHEL itself.
Windows is popular only because MSFT allowed pirated versions to exist (and cheaper license keys).
Had they clamped down, no household would have spent a dime on Vista's successors. I don't mean to compare Vista--the disaster of an OS--to RHEL, but this is an analogy that most of you will relate to, grudgingly, as you recall not getting that Windows license refund.
#### Quote 4
> The generally accepted position that these free rebuilds are just funnels churning out RHEL experts and turning into sales just isn’t reality. I wish we lived in that world, but it’s not how it actually plays out. Instead, we’ve found a group of users, many of whom belong to large or very large IT organizations, that want the stability, lifecycle and hardware ecosystem of RHEL without having to actually support the maintainers, engineers, writers, and many more roles that create it.
**... are you sure?** 😮
Sure, the conversion rate from free users to RHEL customers may not be that high, but I bet you it's not less than 30%. If you keep up with this, the amount of new customers will be less than 10% of current new “sign-ups”.
**The same argument can be made for taking advantage of the free developer license for RHEL.** Creating new Red Hat accounts with temporary email IDs to take advantage of the free developer subscription is a non-trivial task for those who are uninterested in paying for RHEL.
While we are talking about conversion rate, how many of these professionals just use a RHEL clone for their internal product development (to match against RHEL) but do actually provide their customers with support when they use RHEL?
**How do you measure the value provided to your customers by a third party's support?**__You can't__, it isn't something tangible that you can measure.
I'll go on a side tangent where this actual thing happened. My current [small town, local] ISP uses RHEL to authenticate [me and other] users because the company from whom he leased his Internet line, it has an authentication product ready to be deployed on CentOS and RHEL.
Guess what they used internally to develop against RHEL? 😊
#### Quote 5
> Simply rebuilding code, without adding value or changing it in any way, represents a real threat to open source companies everywhere. This is a real threat to open source, and one that has the potential to revert open source back into a hobbyist- and hackers-only activity.
So the work that RHEL clones like Rocky Linux and Alma Linux did as the following projects is not significant enough to be accounted as separate from "simply rebuilding code, **without adding value or changing it in a way**"?
> 💡 I don't know how to rephrase this more politely so please don't take it personally. This comes from the love for RHEL, not misdirected anger at Red Hat [management].
- [Rocky Linux][25] and [Alma Linux][26], both have images for Raspberry Pis, making it even more accessible and cheaper to test the waters before bathing in the metaphorical blissful ocean of Enterprise Linux.
- Alma Linux has a tool called [Elevate][27], which allows **all users** (this obviously includes RHEL and even Alma's "competitor", Rocky Linux) to upgrade from major versions (i.e. from 7.x to 8.x and likewise). I'm sure Red Hat's customers would love such a tool.
- Rocky Linux has a build tool called [Peridot][28]. It allows anyone to have a **custom build of RHEL**. This build may be based off Rocky Linux, or it can even be a company's internal RHEL clone deployed to prevent supply chain attacks.
This reply is also relevant to the following sub-quote from a prior quote:
> Simply repackaging the code that these individuals produce and reselling it as is, with no value added, makes the production of this open source software unsustainable.
They are adding value, _**to the EL ecosystem**_, just not __directly to RHEL__.
### About CentOS Stream...
CentOS Stream is a weird product. Not bad in any sense (at least in my opinion) but weird. It differs from RHEL in the following key ways, one of which is definitely a deal breaker for __someone__:
- It is the testing group for RHEL, which makes things easier for RHEL and SIGs (Special Interest Group) but for your use-case, it may or may not help.
- CentOS Stream doesn't use NVER naming scheme. A minor change like this can break scripts meant to work on RHEL by testing on CentOS Stream. The same can be the case for security updates as [described by a user on Twitter][29].
- As I mentioned, security fixes come late to CentOS Stream; while there are some reasons to do that, it does not help small businesses that remain vulnerable by using RHEL clones.
### Conclusion
Now that CentOS Stream exists, the _**development**_ of RHEL is more open than ever. But, coincidentally, **RHEL's own source** is locked behind a soft paywall that is [**subject to Red Hat's EULA**][30].
This may help Red Hat for now. But if this stance is maintained, without even taking another action against RHEL clones, the user, developer, and support community around Enterprise Linux will wither out, I believe...
I think this will end up hurting Red Hat in the long term as the community around dies out and only exhausted IT professionals (meaning: __people who are forced to work with it, like with Oracle products__) are left using RHEL or worse, Oracle Linux.
I'm not ranting here to call out Red Hat employees. But instead, to let you know that if this is the way you proceed, the community, which loves RHEL, will die out.
I don't want that 😔
I wish Red Hat all the luck in pushing the Linux ecosystem forward! Genuinely ❤️
> ✍️ The opinion is of Pratham Patel, a Red Hat lover and open source tinkerer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
via: https://news.itsfoss.com/red-hat-fiasco/
作者：[Community][a]
选题：[lkxed][b]
译者：[译者ID](https://github.com/译者ID)
校对：[校对者ID](https://github.com/校对者ID)
本文由 [LCTT](https://github.com/LCTT/TranslateProject) 原创编译，[Linux中国](https://linux.cn/) 荣誉推出
[a]: https://news.itsfoss.com/author/team/
[b]: https://github.com/lkxed/
[1]: https://news.itsfoss.com/content/images/size/w1304/2023/07/suicide-attempt-redhat.png
[2]: https://www.jeffgeerling.com:443/
[3]: https://github.com:443/geerlingguy?tab=repositories&q=ansible&type=&language=&sort=
[4]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-and-centos-join-forces
[5]: https://itsfoss.com:443/centos-stream-faq/
[6]: https://rockylinux.org:443/about
[7]: https://almalinux.org:443/blog/introducing-almalinux-beta-a-community-driven-replacement-for-centos/
[8]: https://news.itsfoss.com/red-hat-restricts-source-code/
[9]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/blog/red-hats-commitment-open-source-response-gitcentosorg-changes
[10]: https://developers.redhat.com:443/articles/faqs-no-cost-red-hat-enterprise-linux
[11]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/about/press-releases/red-hat-and-centos-join-forces
[12]: https://rockylinux.org:443/alternative-images/
[13]: https://almalinux.org:443/blog/almalinux-for-raspberry-pi-updates-october-2021/
[14]: https://linuxhandbook.com:443/tag/podman/
[15]: https://itsfoss.com:443/team/
[16]: https://fedoramagazine.org:443/announcing-the-display-hdr-hackfest/
[17]: https://news.itsfoss.com/red-hat-accessibility-gnome/
[18]: https://developer.nvidia.com:443/blog/nvidia-releases-open-source-gpu-kernel-modules/
[19]: https://lists.fedoraproject.org:443/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/IXNTPGKHWTW7H7XVMZICSJRUDOHO2KJC/
[20]: https://nitter.net:443/thefossguy/status/1527935333899583488
[21]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/blog/red-hats-commitment-open-source-response-gitcentosorg-changes
[22]: https://www.redhat.com:443/en/about/our-community-contributions
[23]: https://linuxhandbook.com:443/get-red-hat-linux-free/
[24]: https://www.jeffgeerling.com:443/blog/2023/dear-red-hat-are-you-dumb
[25]: https://rockylinux.org:443/alternative-images/
[26]: https://almalinux.org:443/blog/almalinux-for-raspberry-pi-updates-october-2021/
[27]: https://almalinux.org:443/elevate/
[28]: https://github.com:443/rocky-linux/peridot
[29]: https://nitter.net:443/opdroid1234/status/1672067314789888000
[30]: https://www.jeffgeerling.com:443/blog/2023/gplv2-red-hat-and-you