What do you all think of the Red Hat drama a few months ago? I just learned about it and looked into it a bit. I’ve been using Fedora for a while now on my main system, but curious whether you think this will end up affecting it.

My take is that yes, it’s kinda a shitty move to do but I get why RH decided to stop their maintenance given they’re a for profit company.

What do you guys think? Do you still use or would you consider using Fedora?

  • danielfgom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    There is no justification for this move. Red Hat got seriously rich using FREE LIBRE SOFTWARE and therefore they are BOUND BY THE GPL to freely share and distribute that code.

    They got it for free, they have to pass it on for free. That’s the deal with Libre Computing. Yes they can sell their services and no one is infringing on that.

    If some companies decide they will use a free clone of Red Hat because that cannot afford the Red Hat fees, that’s their decision. It’s not the fault of the free distro. Chances are that that clone distro also offers paid support, which that user is also not paying for. Which is fine.

    Red Hat called the open source community “free loaders” because they reuse the code! WTF?!

    That means according to Red Hat YOU are a free loader because you got Fedora for free. You freaking free loader!

    And not only you but everyone in the community who gets any distro for free are all free loaders!

    Clearly Red Hat have lost the plot and have gone full IBM. I REFUSE to support such a company.

    My view is that no one should use Fedora because you are guinea pigs for Red Hat who takes all the improvements Fedora makes and incorporates then into their Enterprise desktop software.

    Canonical are not much better. They’ve decided to say “f the users, we will be forcing snaps on everyone”. And the Ubuntu flavours are forbidden from adding flatpak support out the box. Another user hostile move.

    Next up: 24.04 will have an all-snaps immutable version alongside the regular ISO. That means they WILL eventually go snaps-only. It’s a matter of time.

    So f that too.

    I’ve realised that the ONLY way to go is to use Community based distros like Debian, Void, Gentoo, Arch etc. Just move away from all corporate Linux.

    Who was responsible for making Linux Subsystem did Windows? Canonical. That was a real dick move against Linux because they reduced it to a simple CLI. As if that’s all Linux is.

    Also, having Libre software running inside proprietary software is an offence to the Principles of Libre computing.

    Now I use Linux Mint Debian Edition because it’s truly 100% community. And it works great!

    IMO Mint will have to drop Ubuntu within the next 2 years and go Debian only. The writing is on the wall.

    • Phrodo_00@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think it’s necessarily a good move but you’re wrong hon several places, like:

      they are BOUND BY THE GPL to freely share and distribute that code.

      No they aren’t. The GPL doesn’t mention anything about price, and they’re only forced to share source code with the people they distribute software to.

      They got it for free, they have to pass it on for free

      They have paid for plenty of oss code

      • danielfgom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re sadly mistaken. The very principle of Libre is sharing. Like sharing a recipe. You get it from someone for free, you can modify the recipe and you MUST pass it on.

        It’s not sharing if you don’t let anyone look at it. That’s the “open source” part - the code must be open for anyone to see and download. That’s the sharing part …

        Google “Richard Stallman Libre software”’ and read everything he wrote to bring yourself up to speed.

        Linux is not just open source. It’s MORE than that, it’s LIBRE. Huge difference.

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just wait until you hear how much if the Linux infrastructure is hosted or maintained by redhat. Spoiler: its a lot

    • Auli
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Except Redhat maintains a ton of code.

      • danielfgom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That can be changed. And should be. Let’s take it away from corps and give it back to the community to maintain

    • TheHarpyEagle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What’s the functional difference between the two Linux Mint versions? I’m thinking of switching to Mint as my daily driver even for my gaming pc, wondering if there’s anything I should be concerned about. Honestly I don’t even know the difference between Debian and Mint aside from the desktop environments they come packaged with.

      • danielfgom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are essentially no functional differences. The only difference is that the regular Ubuntu based Mint will get a newer kernel at the next major upgrade whereas the Debian based one most likely won’t .

        The desktop environment is identical on both.

        Ubuntu is based on Debian, with a few additions they add for enterprise. But Mint makes sure both Ubuntu and Debian Edition’s are the same.

        I highly recommend Mint whichever version you choose because that Team is excellent. Linux Mint is THE best Linux distro.