RHEL, Fedora and CentOS: Solving The Penrose Triangle – Brendan Conoboy

The relationship between Fedora, RHEL, and CentOS is anything but obvious. Over time the interests of each distro and its patrons have grown and shifted, often filling in gaps and creating opportunities. Join us to hear how Red Hat and RHEL have evolved, why Fedora and CentOS are treasured, and how they fit together. From there we will discuss the road ahead, the problems Red Hat is working on, and the opportunities to work on them together.

A presentation from the CentOS Dojo at DevConf.us 2018

Slides: https://goo.gl/wY5GNA

Read More

1 Comment

  1. As to the length of time for new point releases comment at the end:

    1) New point releases now rebase several items .. rebasing shared objects requires many builds of some items, not just one (build order is very important).

    2) When we initially released 7.0, we had 1 arch (and two if you count i386 multilib). Now we have 8 (x86_64, i386, ppc multilib, ppc64, ppc64le, power9, aarch64, armhfp). We need to build all of these at the same time. We especially need to have ppc64le, aarch64, x86_64 be the same as our Community Build System and SIGs utilize those 3 arches .. and we can't break all the SIG content.

    3) We have a Continuous Release repo ( https://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories/CR ) that has the actual RPMs and it usually has the actual packages (but not the ISOs or point release trees) much sooner: ie, about 2 weeks after the RHEL point release.

    4) If you need the content faster, that is what RHEL is for. If RHEL does not exist, then CentOS also does not exist, so we need people to buy RHEL. But I assure you, we are building and testing as fast as we can. Also .. the full time of release for CentOS 7.5.1804 was: 30 days. The 7.0 release you talked about being fast was: 27 days .. I'd say those are basically the same.

Comments are closed.