Who I think CentOS Stream is and isn't for

December 20, 2020

As time goes by and Red Hat people write more official posts (via), I've grown some opinions on who it feels that CentOS Stream is for and is not for. Since I also feel that Red Hat people are not being completely straightforward, I am going to write out my views, as an outsider to the CentOS project but someone who uses CentOS (and Ubuntu LTS) and has in the past used RHEL.

If you want to see if your software will work with upcoming package updates for the latest version of Red Hat Enterprise, CentOS Stream is definitely for you. Giving people a preview of RHEL updates is the expressed purpose of CS. You will not necessarily always be able to build software for RHEL using CentOS Stream, because of periodic ABI and API issues, but Red Hat will probably have a solution for that at some point. CentOS Stream is also probably for you if you operate RHEL systems and want some 'canary' ones to see how future package updates are likely to affect you (and if you see any new bugs or issues).

It's quite possible that for an open source project, using CentOS Stream will also be the easiest way of testing if your software (probably) works on the latest version of RHEL (at least in a fully updated state). However, I'm not all that familiar with the options Red Hat has here (such as their 'Universal Base Image'), and Red Hat may introduce more in the future. If you're a commercial company, the CentOS project distro FAQ makes it clear that Red Hat wants you to buy commercial RHEL licenses.

(Since CentOS Stream for 8 will end package updates in mid 2024, open source projects who want to continue testing for RHEL 8 beyond that point are going to have a problem. I expect that at least some open source projects will simply drop official compatibility with RHEL 8 at that point.)

If for some reason you want to contribute to Red Hat Enterprise, CentOS Stream is also officially for you. The most likely case I can imagine is that you use RHEL (or CentOS) and you have a bugfix or small improvement that you want to push for and contribute, one that Red Hat itself seems unlikely to take on. If you intend to make larger contributions, I hope that you have a strong commercial reason for helping a commercial company with its commercial product.

(To me, this raises significant questions about the future of EPEL. However, Red Hat funds Fedora too, so it could decide to work on funding EPEL should a supply of outside volunteers start to dry up.)

If you want a free RPM based Linux distribution that probably has a five-year support period, CentOS Stream may deliver what you're looking for. Officially it's supposed to, at least at the moment, but one can have concerns about the future and as far as I can tell this is not what CentOS Stream is 'supposed' to be for, at least in the eyes of Red Hat (and Red Hat calls the shots). openSUSE Leap is RPM based and free, but it's only supported for 3 years. Fedora, of course, is RPM based and free but only supported for one year, with version to version migration and an expectation that you'll always be on the most current version.

If you want a well supported Linux distribution with an extremely long support period and fast security updates, CentOS was never really for you in the first place and CentOS Stream is worse (because it definitely has no more than five years of package updates and may have longer delays for security updates). In the past you could press CentOS into service as such a thing and ignore, for example, the delay between RHEL security updates and the rebuilt CentOS security updates that corresponded to them, but you were always accepting a compromise. Now that compromise has blown up on you, although so far only for users of CentOS 8.

(CentOS currently says it will continue supporting CentOS 7 through the end of life of RHEL 7 itself. Since Red Hat calls the shots, I am not certain we should be as confident of that as we might have been before.)

If you want a free version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, the traditional purpose of CentOS, Red Hat more or less says that CentOS Stream is not for you. It is extremely likely that one goal of Red Hat's management is to make it so that no such thing exists any more (and certainly not one that they help pay for). At the moment the closest you can probably come is Oracle Linux, which is also a rebuild of RHEL, but that's if you're willing to put your trust in Oracle (many people are not). It's possible that you can use CentOS Stream for this anyway, but if a lot of people do so I expect Red Hat to take additional steps to discourage this, such as by dropping 'CentOS Stream for 8' support when RHEL 9 comes out (or even before then).

Since 'a free version of RHEL, including its long support period' was in fact what many people used CentOS for, this leaves a significant number of CentOS users without an obvious Linux distribution to use at the moment, although options may well appear in the future.


Comments on this page:

Universal Base Image is a free subset of RHEL that is made available as container images. It’s so folks can build stuff on top of it and distribute the result without needing downstream consumers to be current RHEL customers. There’s a EULA to handle the trademark stuff and the rest is just normal free software.

By Todd at 2020-12-21 08:55:55:

You know, it's a little more "out there", but there's always been one other reason for CentOS to exist, in my eyes. To hold Red Hat to their duty to keep open source software free. There was a time when people were upset with Red Hat's zealous protection of their trademarks, to the point that you couldn't even sell a Red Hat Linux CD because it wasn't actually from the company itself. The place I bought Linux CDs from called them "a prominent North American company" out of protest. No other distro was like that. If you had Slackware on CD, then you called it "Slackware".

So people were skeptical of Red Hat. This company was bringing a profit orientation into the Linux world. Their motives were suspect. Can we trust them? Then along came CentOS, which kind of freed the software. It was an assurance that the free and open source software that Red Hat produced could actually be built and run by everyone else. That the software wasn't just "technically" free, but actually free in the important and provable sense.

Personally, I've come to respect Red Hat quite a bit. I'm somewhat of a fan boy. I think they've done great things for Linux, possibly more than any other company, and they've been in it for the long haul. I've paid for RHEL at every employer that let me, even in cases where I didn't really need the support. I'm agitating for my current employer to pay for OpenShift. We use OKD for core business, we should pay for it. I love how great Red Hat's support is. Documentation is fabulous. I've even been able to work directly with an engineer on occasion.

But all of a sudden I'm feeling that old fear again. Red Hat is bought out by IBM, who wants to make all those billions back from their purchase. And then this happens. I feel like it's time to be wary again.

By Joe Blow at 2021-01-09 11:58:48:

>(To me, this raises significant questions about the future of EPEL. However, Red Hat funds Fedora too, so it could decide to work on funding EPEL should a supply of outside volunteers start to dry up.)

EPEL is like Ubuntu multiverse: the workload is quite low as the community does most of it, and the value is high.

If they defund EPEL they devalue RHEL itself.

It's 2021 my employer is NOT going to give me time / funding to set up my own RPM build service to do basic things that other distributions do "out of the box" (Ubuntu multiverse). Maybe we even de-prioritize running OSes in general in favor of services.

By cks at 2021-01-09 15:31:32:

The problem is exactly that EPEL currently is mostly done by the community. The big reason that the community does that work is that it uses RHEL and CentOS, so it benefits from EPEL. My guess is that most EPEL contributors are using CentOS, not RHEL, so if the CentOS Stream switch means a lot less users of CentOS then the community volunteer time for EPEL will almost certainly go down significantly.

(Also, as CentOS usage goes down, volunteer time on EPEL is increasingly benefiting people who are paying for a commercial product. This is often less attractive to volunteers, especially if they themselves use CentOS less and less.)

Written on 20 December 2020.
« Go modules are soon going to be the only future
The legibility of different versions of ZFS »

Page tools: View Source, View Normal, Add Comment.
Search:
Login: Password:
Atom Syndication: Recent Comments.

Last modified: Sun Dec 20 23:45:14 2020
This dinky wiki is brought to you by the Insane Hackers Guild, Python sub-branch.