xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: A short digression on FOSS (Re: understanding speculative preallocat

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: A short digression on FOSS (Re: understanding speculative preallocation)
From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 22:52:21 -0500
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <21422056.2320.1374867822351.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <21422056.2320.1374867822351.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: stan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
On 7/26/2013 2:43 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:

> But to address your specific point, I don't believe that RH is going to 
> base its opinion on what time its employees spend supporting the remainder
> of the FOSS ecosystem on whether the relevant distro was copied from theirs,
> or not -- and I will be disappointed, publicly, and vocally, if they do.

On 7/26/2013 8:26 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> Disclaimer: I'm the primary RHEL XFS developer, employed by Red Hat.
>
> CentOS is a rebadged RHEL product that is released for free. If you
> want bugs fixed in CentOS, then generally you are on your own. If
> you want paid support where people will fix problems you have, you
> need to pay for RHEL.
>
> You get what you pay for.


Jay, I'm awaiting your public and vocal disappointment.  BTW, Dave has
stated this position regarding CentOS many times.  I'm guessing you're
new to the XFS list (July 13 maybe) or simply missed such prior posts if
you've been lurking much longer.

-- 
Stan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>