[olug] CentOS Dead?

[Kevin]

I have been feeling this myself. My server, which I have been wanting
to move to an updated kernel in hopes that it will accomodate hardware
that I have, is currently running CentOS 5.5. I want to move it to
CentOS 6, but it has been coming <strike>"soon"</strike> for some time
now. RHEL 6.1 is in the works, and CentOS 6.0 is nowhere to be seen. I
have already made the decision to switch my home server to Scientific
because at least it has version 6. I'm watching a thread on the
official CentOS forums and I see that I'm not alone.

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 12:34, Chad Homan <choman at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have no doubt this will be an interesting converstion / thread.  Perhaps
> those more in tune with
> CentOS can fill in the gaps.  But anyways, so I came home for lunch and  saw
> this on distrowatch:
>
>
> [image: CentOS] <http://distrowatch.com/centos> The fans and users of
> CentOS<http://distrowatch.com/centos>,
> the most popular among the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) clones, are
> slowly coming to a realisation that the project is grappling with serious
> troubles. As six months have passed since the release of RHEL 6 without any
> sign of CentOS 6, some are wondering whether they might not be better off
> using the "other" RHEL clone -
> Scientific<http://distrowatch.com/scientific>Linux. Greg Smith
> summarises his feelings in "The
> rise and fall of
> CentOS<http://blog.2ndquadrant.com/en/2011/05/the-rise-and-fall-of-centos.html>":
> "If I needed a sign that it was time for me to start installing Scientific
> Linux 6, this week I found it. Any long-time user of RPM-based distributions
> has probably used a package from a Dag Wieers repository at some point. ...
> Well, that party is over. Last week Dag publicly announced that he was
> resigning from CentOS development work, seemingly over the development
> team's communication issues. In the comments there, Dag specifically
> suggests Scientific Linux as the right distribution to move to now, saying
> that 'their process is more open and the people are actually friendly to
> feedback.' If a tight development group has enough resources to keep its
> users happy, so long as the end result is open-source I'm not going to knock
> the process that got there. But when your release is at least four months
> later than it was expected by most people, and you're causing major
> community contributors to abandon your project in a bad way, I don't have
> any choice but to start looking into more open projects."
>
>
> Let the conversations begin ;)
>
> --
> Chad, CISSP
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> https://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>