If this were taken at face value, then they should have ended CentOS instead of trying to preserve a trademark with a drastically different product.
They built their world on the work of others shared in kind under the GPL, what are they thinking at this new IBM wearing RedHat's face?
To Quote:
The modern definition defines free software by whether or not the recipient has the following four freedoms:[8]
The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
They built their world on the work of others shared in kind under the GPL, what are they thinking at this new IBM wearing RedHat's face?
To Quote: The modern definition defines free software by whether or not the recipient has the following four freedoms:[8]
The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0). The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this. The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2). The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.