OpenELA is a non-profit trade association of open source Enterprise Linux distribution developers.
There are many Linux Distributions that are perfectly suitable for enterprise use cases and environments. For the purpose of this charter and project, OpenELA recognizes “Enterprise Linux” (EL) as 1:1 and bug-for-bug source code compatibility which today is aligned to RHEL and CentOS.
OpenELA’s mission is to provide a secure, transparent, and reliable Enterprise Linux source that is globally available to all as a buildable base.
OpenELA is a collaboration created and upheld by CIQ, Oracle, and SUSE.
Read the recent article on the formation of OpenELA by Richard Speed at The Register
ParanoidFactoid may be interested in this development.
comunity repositories, but controled by a bunch of companies?, one of them being oracle?, between oracle and red hat? really? also people use red hat for the enterprise support, if they don’t want the support why would they go with openELA instead of Debian or other thing?, and ironic that openELA is removing the rhel costumers, and if that kill rhel, openela is dead too, but SUSE is there and oracle, both of them could be very happy with RH dead, interesting
If RH survives because of the support, why would they care about this? Only reason it’s a thing is because of their idea of restricting the rhel code. Restricted enterprise Linux is worse than no enterprise Linux.
I’m just guessing but I think rhel made money off their support already, but someone in management figured “we’re giving this away for free!”
they didn’t want other companies (oracle, or rocky linux etc) using their code and lucrating on top of it, without helping in nothing, rhel that pay the devs, that fixes linux, improve mesa, that work on features, i agree that they restricting it isn’t in the opensource spirit, but they aren’t breaking the gpl, and i would be a hypocrital in don’t wanting rhel to keep making money, pipewire is a dream, dbus fixes tons of issues with other implementations, xorg and wayland(they are mainteiners of both) flatpak, mesa drivers, systemd is good, that why everyone is using it, etc i like that tech, that what make linux desktop being that good today, and i use it, and it is privacy friendly and open-source, that’s enough for me(if they close-source it, i would switch)
Without gpl source there would be no RHEL. If they want closed source there’s other kernels with userlands under proprietary licences or bsd-like, yet they went for the GPL one. To lucrate (?) on top of it.
How many do you reckon would be using systemd if it was closed source? What about Wayland? I’m thinking mostly just you and their fanclub
CentOS(original)/Alma Linux/Rocky Linux, and Oracle Linux are based on RHEL They’ve been in use for a while.
I’m not sure what you’re referring to here.
people going to openELA instead of RHEL, and giving less money for redhat, basicly what i said
that why red hat limited the source code, and to be fair, i kinda agree with them, rocky, alma and oracle are gaining money on top of rhel meanwhile who pay the devs and fixes the issue are redhat
RHEL has already agreed to giving the source vode to anyone they distribute their software to. It doesn’t matter if they no longer like that agreement. They are bound by it because they willingly entered into it. RHEL doesn’t make money by selling their software. They make money by consulting to companies that want to use the software and augment that software for their needs.