
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Considered Harmful - deverton
https://medium.com/@sargun/red-hat-enterprise-linux-considered-harmful-c95af86062f4#.bc2shvitm
======
digi_owl
RH may be dangerous, but not for the reasons this article presents.

While Torvalds holds the kernel devs to the mantra, higher layers are less
stringent about not breaking.

For example compiler optimizations are a duel edged sword. There seems to not
be a months without there being and article on the NH front page about C
ambiguities that compilers will mangle as they see fit.

The article also gloss over that Fedora is backed by RH, it is pretty much
their development branch. Many of the people working on Fedora are RH
employees.

And that is perhaps the real danger of RH. So much that is happening above the
kernel right now come straight out of Fedora.

The people involved there pretty much decide the course for Linux user space,
and then supposedly independent orgs like Gnome and Freedesktop rubber-stamp
that course.

This because they can devote their day to hammering out reams of code that
solidifies that direction, while other distros have to rely on the spare time
of their community members.

~~~
sargun
Right, I think that Red Hat the company is great. RHEL on the other hand
isn't. I love Fedora. I love the work that RedHat does on Gluster, Ceph, and
all of their other technologies.

RedHat changing this one thing about RHEL would radically change the way
enterprise software works.

[Author]

~~~
digi_owl
And sink their ship in the process. What RH is doing with RHEL, is exactly
what Microsoft has been doing with Windows for so long.

~~~
sargun
Err? The Windows kernel actually moves at a pretty reasonable pace, even on
server.

