Comments by "Anony Mousse" (@anon_y_mousse) on "Red Hat Responds To The RHEL Source Code Drama" video.

  1. Agreed, and my take is that the community's response being so negative is disappointing. No one works for free and still eats. Although, to be fair, I'm going to assume that most of the negativity comes from a place of ignorance where people don't actually understand what's being done.
    5
  2. Scrubbing trademarks isn't added value, it's just infringement. They put in work to make the binaries and they have their name behind them. If you come along and make them free then why would anyone pay them money to get their work? So that's removing value, potentially theft. Your take on compiler optimization makes me think you're not a developer. You can't just change a flag and everything will work better for a given system, some things, yes, but not everything. The code has to actually be optimized in how it's written by the developers first and foremost. The one valid point you make is that of compiling for different architectures, and even that's undercut by the fact that they provide for the architecture that is used the most in server environments as well as the second most used architecture. Since the third most accounts for a rounding error it's not worth their time or effort. Finally, the code will still be available to paying customers so they can do all of the above anyway. So nope, not a threat to anything, and the community is proving that they deserve the market share they have.
    3
  3. But what about the code that they've written? They've contributed to the kernel and gotten nothing in return for that. All the code that they've written which constitutes the RHEL ecosystem is 100% theirs to do with as they please and use any license they want. Everything else is still as open as the developers of those projects want them to be.
    2
  4. I'm starting to get the impression that most people who are really angry about this move think that RH is going to close up the source for projects that aren't under their control or they're going to do something else equally nefarious, because they don't seem to understand what RH is actually doing. Nothing is going to actually be closed, it's just going to be harder for the rebuilders, and who cares about them, they could retool and base their distros off of another upstream. Unnecessary work, sure, but they're basically riding their coattails and providing little if any benefit.
    2
  5.  @IzzyIkigai  Except that they don't be doing that for people redistributing GPL code, but rather their own code which they're going to use a different license for. The question at that point becomes, should they be allowed to do what they want with their own code? The answer is most definitely yes, but from your post I'm going to assume you're a communist and don't think anyone should be paid for the work they do.
    1
  6.  @BrodieRobertson  If they give their source code to the people who pay for their support services, then how would this be getting in the way of that?
    1