Photo : AlmaLinux Day, held on March 18, 2024 in Rust, Germany. Does that mean more Rust in the Linux kernel ? :-)

  • LeFantome@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    The reason this is a first is because AlmaLinux recently decided to stop being a bug for bug clone of RHEL. Good for them. As this shows, they are now actually free to add value.

    Rocky Linux cannot ship this patch unless RHEL does. Rocky cannot contribute anything by definition.

  • rollingflower@lemmy.kde.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Nice and all, but…

    Projects leaching on the work of companies like that, “freeing the code” (which literally just means huge companies will not pay a cent for Linux in the future too) and adding their 2 cents, is not really a big effort.

    The same thing with other projects that “became nonfree” and where forked to “stay free”.

    If a license says “you can use it for free, but need to share profits over x$” it is free software in any way we should be concerned about it.

    • gorysubparbagel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Then by that logic, redhat is leeching off the work of the Linux kernel developers and the other Foss software in redhat

    • valveman@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Projects leaching on the work of companies like that, “freeing the code”.

      You mean it the other way, right? Because these companies you defend use the free labor of voluntary developers from the community, which spend hours and hours developing features, fixing bugs and what not, directly or indirectly. That’s how open source works.

      When these companies change the project license to a closed source one, they’re basically saying a big “f*** you” to the community. Forking the latest open source version of the repository is nothing more than an effort to keep things the way they were.

      huge companies will not pay a cent for Linux in the future

      Linux is FOSS, you can do whatever you want with it as long as you redistribute it without modifying the license. Android does that; every GNU/Linux distribution does that. That’s how it works.

      if a license says “you can use it for free, but need to share profits over x$”

      What you’re describing is “freeware”, what this post is discussing is " open source software". There’s a giant gap between the two.

      • TMP_NKcYUEoM7kXg4qYe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        The issue started when Mr. Root Mean Square came up with the term “Free Software”. It should have been called “freedom respecting software” and we would not have to deal with people confusing free software with Free Software.

        • valveman@lemmy.eco.br
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Yeah, but there’s also the term “freeware”, which means closed source but free to use.

          I’ll edit my comment for clarity, thanks for the heads up.