• @yarn
    link
    266
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    deleted by creator

    • exu
      link
      fedilink
      13310 months ago

      In its blog post Red Hat specifically called out downstream distributions for not contributing anything to the development of RHEL and that they should be making fixes to CentOS Stream. Well, this is a fix for CentOS Stream and Red Hat still doesn’t care. They just don’t want community contributions.

      • @yarn
        link
        29
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        deleted by creator

        • @Flaky@iusearchlinux.fyi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2410 months ago

          Sounds to me like they messed up the communication between them and the devs. If they directed the PR submitter to Fedora, I think there wouldn’t be as much fuel to the fire.

          Granted, all the chaos surrounding RHEL does make me a little worried for Fedora. Fedora is not a bad distro by any means, and I don’t want to have to not recommend it because of the drama.

          • @Qvest@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            510 months ago

            The only thing Red Hat has power over Fedora is its name and infrastructure. Red Hat can’t decide for Fedora. Do they have Red Hat employees working for Fedora? Yes, they do, but the employees decide for Fedora, not for Red Hat. Besides, all the telemetry drama is being sorted out in the most open way possible over on Discourse (Fedora Discussion). It is still a 100% community distribution despite a lot of people saying “it is already decided” “Fedora is doomed” etc.

        • @Zeth0s@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Why would they accept PR at all if they don’t have a robust testing process and approvals are dictated by customers needs?

          The message as it is now to potential contributors is that their contribution in not welcome, unless it’s free labor that financially benefits only ibm.

          Which is fair, but the message itself is a new PR issue for red hat

          • @yarn
            link
            6
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            deleted by creator

            • @Zeth0s@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              0
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I read it, and I read the messages from the devs. The communication issue I am trying to point is also highlighted in the comments: if the decision on merging a PR is uniquely dictated by financial benefits of IBM, ignoring the broader benefits of the community, the message is that red hat is looking for free labor and it is not really interested in anything else. Which is absolutely the case, as we all know, but writing it down after the recent events is another PR issue, as red hat justified controversial decisions on the lack of contributions from downstream.

              The Italian dev tried to put it down as “we have to follow our service management processes that are messy, tedious and expensive” but he didn’t address the problems in the original message. The contributor himself felt like they asked his contribution just to reject it because of purely financial reasons without any additional details. It is a new PR incident

              • @yarn
                link
                1
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                deleted by creator

      • jerry
        link
        fedilink
        -210 months ago

        Not having resources to test it right this second isn’t “doesn’t care” it’s just a lower priority.

      • @yarn
        link
        3
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        deleted by creator

    • @angrymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      45
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      But it is also another stab in the community, they took centos that was a community project for them, then transformed this project that was downstream to upstream, then called all other downstream distros a negative net worth cause they don’t engage in the process of RHEL, then blocked the acess to this distros to the downstream, then reject the work of this ppl they called net negative without a decent process.

      What actually red hat wants?

      Centos now is only a beta branch? Ppl who wants derive from centos should be fixing everything downstream and duplicate work cause centos now is just an internal beta from red hat? If yes, why they took the project from the community? I’m not a rpm based distros user but I totally understand why ppl are pissed.

      • @digdilem@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        What actually red hat wants?

        All the control and all of the money.

        Besides that, I suspect they have no clear vision. And if they do, they are absolutely terrible at communicating that.

      • @yarn
        link
        1
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        deleted by creator

        • @angrymouse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          1410 months ago

          I’m making no comments about you making or no comments on centOS being repurposed. I’m just saying that this blown-up is probably caused by a mixture of miscommunication between RHEL and a community that feels like being tossed aside, I just said that because you said that you felt unjustified.

          • @yarn
            link
            0
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            deleted by creator

            • @yarn
              link
              3
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              deleted by creator

            • @angrymouse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              I’m getting downvoted on my comment about not making a comment on CentOS

              I don’t think so, you are probably getting downvoted because you said exactly this:

              The blowup about this particulat bug doesn’t seem justified to me.

              And seems somehow offended that I replied to this statement trying to explain (not necessarily justify)

              • @yarn
                link
                3
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                deleted by creator

    • Marxine
      link
      fedilink
      2110 months ago

      That could have been better communicated though. What you said is reasonable, what Michal said isn’t as much.

    • @FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      1510 months ago

      Fedora is where this sort of thing is supposed to go. That’s been Red Hat philosophy since forever. Patch as high upstream as you can. Sounds like this is a non issue.

      • @Zeth0s@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        210 months ago

        The Apparently is already patch on fedora… Just reporting other comments in this thread. But why do they accept contribution to centos of they don’t want patches that are not economically beneficial to the company? It is a pretty bad message written as this

    • @digdilem@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      610 months ago

      Agree on point of detail, but the “drama” is the reason for the fuss. Redhat’s communication, especially to the community that helped build and support it, has always been patchy, but over the past few years it’s been apalling. As others have pointed out, they’ve insulted a lot of us, specifically for not contributing upstream - so it’s not unexpected for them to be called on it when someone does.

      I think the EL sphere as a whole (including RHEL and all up and downstreams) is getting drastically weakened directly because of Redhat’s poor decision making, and that’s a shame for all of us.