Red Hat Lays Groundwork for Fedora Foundation 118
rob writes " Computer Business Review is reporting that Red Hat has announced plans to hand over control of its Fedora community-led Linux development project to the new Fedora Foundation as part of a new three-pronged intellectual property strategy. "
dupe (Score:5, Informative)
Time for a new /. slogan! (Score:5, Funny)
News for the amnesiac. Stuff that mattered.
Re:Time for a new /. slogan! (Score:1)
That slogan seems a dupe [google.fr] to me.
And each time submitted by the same editor, dark-br.
I call that... (Score:2)
Re:Time for a new /. slogan! (Score:1)
News for the amnesiac. Stuff that matters again.
Re:dupe (Score:5, Funny)
Re:dupe (Score:2, Funny)
You must be new here
Re:dupe (Score:3, Funny)
Says the AC to
Re:dupe (Score:2)
but it had no effect obviously.
Re:dupe (Score:1)
Re:dupe (Score:2)
Re:dupe (Score:1)
Re:dupe (Score:1)
Does that make you drink beer until Slashdot stories/dupes look better??
Re:dupe (Score:2)
Re:dupe - expect more of these ... (Score:2)
I'm sure this is a contributing factor to this dupe since the /. Editors aren't able to do their exhaustive searches for dupes that they normally do, plus I'm sure they are busy fixing the broken search functionality ... ;-)
What is official RH distro then? (Score:2)
Re:What is official RH distro then? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What is official RH distro then? (Score:4, Informative)
fixed link (Score:1)
Re:What is official RH distro then? (Score:2)
Re:What is official RH distro then? (Score:3, Informative)
what Redhat in effect is doing is creating a division between Redhat and the Fedora project much like the division between Redhat and SuSE.
Not exactly. Fedora is essentially the groundwork for future editions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). Yes, they are different distros, but the division is not that significant. Structurally, they are very much the same.
Re:What is official RH distro then? (Score:2)
It's more free than free beer. Redhat has no more right to Linux than you or I. It is important for them to keep Fedora moving so as to continue to have the development community behind them.
And while Fedora and the RHEL/RHAS/RHWhatever technically sprang from the older "RedHat" model, last I checked, RHEL/RHAS/RHWhatever derive from Fedora.
Spinning off Fedora is wise on the part of Redhat. Now the window of opportunity for Novell to strike up SuSE marketshare through Redhat alienating the communit
Re:What is official RH distro then? (Score:2)
Fedora has always been a separate distro, ever since Fedora Core 1 was released in 2003. Red Hat wanted more external developers to work on their code, but if I have been following things correctly, many developers were wary of contributing as Red Hat still had the final say of what was included and what wasn't. Hence Red Hat want
Re:What is official RH distro then? (Score:2)
Have fun with your own real open source fedora (Score:1)
Not that Debian is a pure user release, but at least it is completely assembled by them.
Fresh Dupe (Score:2, Troll)
Re:Fresh Dupe (Score:5, Funny)
If you answered "No" to all the above questions, maybe you should quit your whiny-ass bitching about duplicate stories and contribute something meaninful to another discussion.
Re:Fresh Dupe (Score:1)
Oh, so *that's* where these damn pimples come from!
Re:Fresh Dupe (Score:2)
(Above, I use the word "suspicion" because most people don't know what it's like to run a site so large, and can only speculate.)
The faq [slashdot.org] says they want to get the stories out fast, but that's bogus [slashdot.org].
Headline should say... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Headline should say... (Score:2)
Damn stalker distros.
Which open source community was that? (Score:2)
Are you talking about the open source community that includes people like Alan Cox [redhat.com], Ingo Molnar [redhat.com], Havoc Pennington [ometer.com], and Owen Taylor [redhat.com]? It never left.
Are you part of a new, anti-RedHat OSS community? What have you written?
Re:Which open source community was that? (Score:2)
The open source community isn't always centered around enterprise solutions. When RedHat removed their "personal" distro and focused only on enterprise, they alienated a lot of people, even though they continued to contribute to OSS in a big way.
I was one of them...I used RedHat exclusively on all my machines, but the move to Fedora pushed me away (the last FC I tried was
Re:Which open source community was that? (Score:5, Informative)
And even though the product that pays the bills retains the name "Red Hat", it's as Open Source as any distro you can find. That's why I can download distro's like CentOS and WhiteBox that are exact clones of RHEL developed almost exclusively from the SRPM's released openly by the RHEL project.
If anyone in the OSS community is annoyed by the reoganization, it's probably because it is a little confusing. But this is it in a nutshell:
One product is a cutting edge distro for all of us to enjoy using and developing.
One product is the stable branch of an older version of the community disto that's packaged and sold with support to big corporations who gain from chosing the software.
There's nothing wrong with selling OSS. Consider RMS:
"Many people believe that the spirit of the GNU project is that you should not charge money for distributing copies of software, or that you should charge as little as possible -- just enough to cover cost.
Actually, we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can." - Richard Stallman
Red Hat employs developers who not only use OSS, but contribute a great deal of it back to the community for all of us to enjoy -- even those of us who don't run Red Hat distributions personally. Again, RMS:
"Red Hat's contributing to the GNU project by hiring people to write on the GNU desktop, Gnome, which is a very useful contribution."
Re:Which open source community was that? (Score:2)
First, I never objected to selling Open Source Software. You're simply misreading me in that regard.
Second, I never said that their enterprise distro wasn't open. It has been, and as far as I can tell, will continue to be.
My beef is that they took a product I most valued them for (a desktop, personal OS) and made a move that *reduced* their ownership of that product. They handed is back to the community, in effect, offering a substantial amount of suppo
Re:Headline should say... (Score:2)
Re:Headline should say... (Score:2)
Open source is the foundation for Red Hat's business model. Everything they release is available for you and I to use in anything we want. In fact, they acquire other software and release it under the GPL. And so what if they've learned how to create a profitable business using and developing OSS? Good for them. Everybody wins.
Will MPlayer ever be a Fedora Extra package? (Score:1)
Personally, I think the answer is a solid "maybe".
Re:Will MPlayer ever be a Fedora Extra package? (Score:2)
Besides, Fedora prefers GStreamer and Helix.
Re:Will MPlayer ever be a Fedora Extra package? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Will MPlayer ever be a Fedora Extra package? (Score:2)
Re:Will MPlayer ever be a Fedora Extra package? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Will MPlayer ever be a Fedora Extra package? (Score:3, Informative)
Though there is an attempt to resolve these issues. Documentation of these efforts is avaliable on one of the Debian developer's websites [debian.org].
Re:Will MPlayer ever be a Fedora Extra package? (Score:1)
Same notation for Real Player. In fact, just like with Windows, the latest version installs just fine, but it opens and then immediately dies less than one second later.
Xine on the other hand actually has a better track record at running everything than VLC does. As long as I have Xine and the codec package I'm plenty happy.
Re:Gentoo (Score:1)
Re:Gentoo (Score:1)
As far as I can tell, mplayer is not included in the GRP list, so it is NOT shipped with Gentoo. The ebuild is there for you to run if you want to install it later, but it isn't shipped with Gentoo.
Re:Gentoo (Score:2)
Re:Will MPlayer ever be a Fedora Extra package? (Score:3, Informative)
It's just that some people have made
Nother dupe... (Score:1)
Re:Nother dupe... (Score:2)
Fedora Core 4 (Score:1)
Re:Fedora Core 4 (Score:1)
At one point, yes. But the date's been pushed back to next week. [redhat.com]
Re:Fedora Core 4 (Score:2)
Here's [redhat.com] the public release schedule.
How does this benefit RH? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:How does this benefit RH? (Score:2)
Re:How does this benefit RH? (Score:2)
Re:How does this benefit RH? (Score:3, Informative)
I just hope it's not the classic 3 prong strategy (Score:3, Funny)
1) Do something.
2) ???
3) Profit!
Linux and Free Software are not perfect (Score:2, Interesting)
1) No unification in package management. RPM is flawed (hi dependancy hell), and YUM is only a bandaid on the solution. DEB is great, but only debian based distributions support it. Windows may have multiple companies doing install programs, but at least they're all doing mostly the same thing.
2) The re
Re:Linux and Free Software are not perfect (Score:2, Informative)
1) No unification in package management. RPM is flawed (hi dependancy hell), and YUM is only a bandaid on the solution. DEB is great, but only debian based distributions support it.
With the availability of so many rpm frontends, how is it that this "rpm dependency hell" myth persists? And how praytell do you figure
Re:Linux and Free Software are not perfect (Score:2)
It's just a troll that posts the same damned thing in every story he can find.
Re:Linux and Free Software are not perfect (Score:2)
Alt-Tab switches between X11 apps in Fedora. The behaviour is practically identical to Windows. I switch between full screen mplayer/ogle and apps like Evolution/Firefox all the time.
Doesn't this work for you?
Cheers
Stor
Dupe Posting Protest (Score:1)
Re:Dupe Posting Protest (Score:1)
I'm with you!
Re:Dupe Posting Protest (Score:2)
Redhat drops the ball again (Score:1)
Re:Redhat drops the ball again (Score:2)
Re:If by "belly up" you mean... (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm a Red Hat fan but if the above is true please tell me where to get security update RPMs for RedHat 8.0. At the moment I'm building SRPMs of Apache2 and the dependencies I have to fulfil are staggering. Automake, autoconf, pcre, etc need to be updated. This is going to take me a day to update Apache because I need to compile all this stuff.
Debian seems to handle this situation a whole lot be
Re:If by "belly up" you mean... (Score:2)
I *you* want to support RH8.0 on fedoralegacy, go ahead and volunteer.
Personally, 8.0 -> 9 was painless, I tried it and didn't have any problems (its the same OS, pretty much).
At the time, I couldn't figure out WHY RH bothered with RH9, instead of just doing RH8.1 (.2, whatever).
It *should* have been a point release.
I recommend that you TAKE the point release 8.0 -> 9, then use fedoralegacy support.
YMMV
Ratboy
Re:If by "belly up" you mean... (Score:2)
Yeah sure point taken.
Personally, 8.0 -> 9 was painless, I tried it and didn't have any problems (its the same OS, pretty much).
On your home machine?
We're talking about a client server here with all sorts of odd software dependencies and custom modifications. I've told them that addressing that would be beneficial. Upgrading software on this machine is security-critical but will break stuff and I'll have to fix it. That's cool:
Re:If by "belly up" you mean... (Score:2)
Good luck with the migration.
Ratboy
I'm happy as things are (Score:1)
I'm happy with FC3 as is, a lot of neat stuff still hasn't been ported from FC2 (./configure, make, make install, lather, rinse, repeat, nope no luck), and
Redhat == Proprietary OS (Score:1)
Before I get modded down:
-Red Hat will continue to contribute to Linux.
-Red Hat will still promote most things good for Linux as in patents and other IP issues.
I think they are becoming as proprietary as possible. For example, they recently open-sourced the Fedora Directory Project. http://directory.fedora.redhat.com/wiki/Main_Page [redhat.com]
I (boldly/foolishly) predict the administration tools won't get open-sourced. Because there is way
Re:Redhat == Proprietary OS (Score:2)
If this was the case, then we should have seen, by now, major Linux vendors distributing closed source OpenLDAP, Samba, Apache, etc configuration tools.
Re:Redhat == Proprietary OS (Score:1)
Regards,
Steve
Red Hat is a company, people (Score:4, Insightful)
You will not find Red Hat "stealing" OSS code, compiling it into proprietary work, and not telling anybody. You won't find them attempting to "extend" open code with proprietary extensions without releasing those extensions, too.
They pay for a good, healthy staff of developers that work almost solely on GPL and otherwise released code. They release source binaries as though all their stuff was GPL, even with projects that are BSD-ish licensed.
It's not that difficult to take their source RPMs and create your own "Enterprise Linux", as done by Scientific Linux [scientificlinux.org], Cent O/S [centos.org], and (my favorite) Whitebox Linux [whiteboxlinux.org].
I don't like that they don't support good old "RedHat Linux" like they used to, but as a company, RedHat has been nothing but good for the community. If you choose to have a hissy, then enjoy your hissy, and move on to Debian/Gentoo/LFS/Ubuntu/Mandrake/Whatever/YALD (Yet Another Linux Distro) to your heart's content.
But, I see no sign that RedHat is doing anything evil at all.
Foundation? (Score:2)
When reading the headline, was I the only one who completed it as "Redhat Lays Groundwork for Fedora Foundation ... at the other end of the galaxy"? Oh. Guess not.
Re:Fedora Core 3 sucks (Score:1)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:1)
Maybe it's because there are plenty of people like me who love Gnome. It's innovative, it works and looks great, too.
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:1)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
But...
- It draws "better" Less pixels refreshed, which means its better remoted than KDE.
- Its object model is CORBA. More widely supported.
- Just my opinion, but it just looks better.
- Easily locked down desktops
Ratboy
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
Corba is less widely supported overall, because it has to be specifically included, so far from all applications within gnome support it. DCOP gets added to actions with zero effort from developers, with the result that even if they're all within KDE, overall there's more applications using DCOP than CORBA. And since both are moving to standardised DBUS it won't make much difference canyway.
How can you say that? It's
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:1)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
Most (smart) distro's try to only officially 'support' one app. only firefox, only xine, only OOffice. If someone thinks K office is better then its still there but most of that development was done by a KDEish distro. and if someone on SUSe thinks gedit is better most of that work comes from RedHat guys. see how it works? we don't have to do aggressive development on every application included in the OS. they do the aggressive development in the dire
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
Oh, man. I was going to let this pass, but... man. You're just plain wrong. Licensing QT is nothing for even a small company, let alone Oracle. Face it, it comes down to a cost-benefit analysis - if the cost of supporting KDE was less than they money they could make by supporting it, they'd do it. Simple as that.
As it stands, though, Oracle and other major companies a
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
If you're producing an app then as a developer you have to fight for *Every* penny that gets spent. That means if you have the choice of using GTK for $0 or QT for $500 (or whatever it costs) you'll use GTK. Not because it's too expensive, but because the pain of justifying the expense is too great, will take about a month and cause you to miss your deadline.
(example: At one job we had 5 developers working for 2 weeks to track down a
Re:Why not using KDE ? (Score:2)
First - the discussion wasn't about me or my work history; it was about whether or not Oracle's desire to save a few bucks per developer was the reason that RedHat went with Gnome over KDE. I don't know if you consider Oracle to be a "small/medium sized company"; I certainly don't.
Second - yes, I have worked for small companies my entire adult life (modulo a short stint in the US Navy.) The largest company I've ever worked for consi