Notices by Martyn Welch (mwelchuk@mastodon.social)

@Migueldeicaza @aruiz I assume that RedHat are still providing exact SRPMs via basically the same mechanism that they provide their customers the RPMs (i.e. the ones receiving the binaries).

At least as far as the GPL is concerned, is there something I'm missing that means they're not complying with that licence (i.e. v2: 3a, v3: 6d)?

Given that AFAIK, the rule in RH is that changes must be upstream first, how are they not actually going above and beyond what's actually required?

@Migueldeicaza @aruiz The only people that now seem to miss out are those wanting to run an enterprise grade Linux, but without financially helping support the effort of maintaining one.

It's not like RHEL is the only available Linux distribution. There are even "stable" community maintained distros if providing financial support is not your thing.

Given that AFAIK all fixes are already upstream, other than rebuilding and offering a free RHEL clone, what can't now be done?

@Migueldeicaza @aruiz No, unless you pay, you'll never get to run it. If you pay, you get access to identical source.

That's clearly a change from how it's been done in the past, however it's no different from a lot of OEMs from my experience (you don't get access to their Linux until you buy the product for which it's provided).

Unless I've miss-understood or RedHat have changed their operating procedures, then any fixes in RHEL are upstream already.