Ubuntu founder doesn't "get" enterprise Linux <OT>

[Les Mikesell]

Ric Moore wrote:

> I tend to agree with you Martin, as RH's lawyers have undoubtedly been
> all over the GPL with a fine tooth comb. Maybe the word used was
> RedHat's "offering' of a set of CD's and a built-in price for support,
> while the SRPMS are freely available for redistribution, then they have
> satisfied the intent of the GPL. Then you just pick it up or lay it
> down. Plus, the fact that FC is married in a sense to RedHat and thereby
> an extension of it, that to say that RedHat is a closed binary is not
> -entirely- accurate. Maybe some, at some point between 0% and 100%, but
> not entirely. 
> 
> So to that effect if Marks statement was 100% correct, then CentoOS
> would not and could not exist. Yet, on the other hand, CentOS does exist
> which negates the statement that RH would be *-completely-* closed,
> instead of 'to-a-degree' closed. Kinda like being a little-bit pregnant,
> but I think you see my point, even if you do not agree with it, ole
> friend Les. It is open enough to satisfy the GPL and probably not one
> erg of energy more. 

In practice, what matters in terms of being 'open' is how easily someone 
else can take a complete existing work, add value to improve it, and 
redistribute the combination.   CentOS does a lot of work just to get to 
the point where redistribution is allowed and doesn't add much except an 
option kernel with more drivers included.  I'd rather see that work go 
into something like a better installer, or combining newer desktop apps 
into the stable kernel/libs from RHEL - but nobody does because RH goes 
out of their way to make it difficult to compete by adding improvements.
Contrast that with the Debian base and Ubuntu/Mepis/Knoppix if you don't 
see a difference.

> Also, RedHat has poured more money into devel than just about any other
> distro, so you at least tip your hat to who brung ya to the dance
> instead of bitch-slapping at them. It's considered poor form in "Polite
> Society".  

OK, but at the same time you have to admit that RedHat has dumped more 
bugs onto more people's desktops than any other Linux system and that 
most of the stability they enjoy now came as a result of bugs reported 
by their early users - and these same users now are prohibited from 
freely copying the enterprise product around.  It's not quite the way 
anyone expected things to turn out.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com