Recent searches
Search options
I get the feeling too many people are sleeping on CentOS Stream because of how the CentOS #Linux EOL thing went down.
I mean sure, the messaging wasn't great but it happened and it is what it is. Don't let that detract from the greatness of the #CentOS Stream project in its own right and as a collaboration point for all the #RHEL based distros.
The gravity seems lost on most that for the first time ever the RHEL development process happens in the open. That's amazing. I love it. #community
@maxamillion While I agree, it's definitely not helping things that CentOS Stream still goes EOL well before RHEL, AlmaLinux, etc.
@maxamillion That doesn't mean it isn't good or useful, but that it takes more intentional consideration in deploying it than CentOS Linux did.
@maxamillion This is unfortunately not trivial. I've had some trouble with filing Github issues against CentOS Stream because the upstream only now "supports Rocky", etc. Having to cut through the FUD around it gets tiring, honestly, but CS is still really nice for having fast track container patches and as a CI platform. I mean, I'm still using it very much, but I understand why there's preference for the rebuilds.
@maxamillion I would also be quick to point out that CS is part of the success story for AlmaLinux as they build against CS repos ahead of their own releases, which is part of why they're so quick to have stuff out when RHEL releases (especially compared to Rocky and Oracle who tend to have significant more lag).
@carlwgeorge@fosstodon.org@vwbusguy @maxamillion I don't think that's accurate. Have they said that anywhere?
@carlwgeorge @maxamillion It's something I've observed directly in their git repos. For example, leading up to the RHEL9 release, many of their repositories had CS9 branches. Same is true for their cloud images that had CentOS Stream 9 as the base image before AlmaLinux 9 was released and the repo rebased to it.
@vwbusguy @maxamillion Having c9s git branches doesn't mean they actually built against CS. They likely just sync those branches from GitLab as a reference, or when they need to build a buildroot-only package. I could be missing something, but lacking actual confirmation from their team I wouldn't assume they build against CS at all.
Temporarily basing their images against CS to validate build pipelines makes sense, but clearly isn't an ongoing thing helping their rebuild turnaround time.