- cross-posted to:
- yt_tech@lemmy.link
- diducthis@lemmy.piperservers.net
- bofh@group.lt
- cross-posted to:
- yt_tech@lemmy.link
- diducthis@lemmy.piperservers.net
- bofh@group.lt
An exceptionally well explained rant that I find myself in total agreement with.
An exceptionally well explained rant that I find myself in total agreement with.
Those snapshots are not CentOS Stream. You are not running CentOS Stream, in the state in which it is provided, when you run a RHEL release. They arent entirely separate, but that’s exaggerating the claim and not what I’m arguing. The people who are using RHEL as provided are not able to redistribute the thing which they are using.
Whether the GPL says the redistributed code has to be a bug-for-bug compatible copy of RHEL is up for lawyers to decide. In my mind, saying “I am not running Software Foobar, I am running Software Foobar released a few months ago” seems like a silly distinction in this case, especially when talking about the health of FOSS.
Once again, their adherence to the letter of the GPL is certainly up for debate, I said as much at the start.
Their violation of its intent, however, is not. They are putting up roadblocks, however trivial or insignificant you seem to believe they are, to limit your freedom in redistributing they code they are providing. Period. This controversy would not exist if they weren’t.