Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Friday August 29 2014, @07:53AM   Printer-friendly
from the a-tip-of-the-fedora dept.

Longtime employee and CTO of RedHat is leaving the company.

“We want to thank Brian for his years of service and numerous contributions to Red Hat’s business. We wish him well in his future endeavors,” said Jim Whitehurst, President and CEO of Red Hat.

ZDNet reports:

Stevens' eyes may have been wandering elsewhere because of conflicts with Red Hat's president of products and technologies Paul Cormier. Cormier will be taking over the office of the CTO for the time being.

His future? It's unclear but it's possible he's moving to greener pastures, "a major California-based technology company."

Commence wild speculation! What does this mean for RedHat and GNU/Linux? Anything?

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Marand on Saturday August 30 2014, @12:37AM

    by Marand (1081) on Saturday August 30 2014, @12:37AM (#87404) Journal

    Yeah, I caught that bit about you using it since the 90s and figured you'd started using it at a similar time that I did, but I wasn't going to let facts get in the way of a good ribbing ;)

    Honestly, it's not even that I was unhappy with RedHat at the time. I was new and it was suggested to me because it's what was used at the job I had, so I didn't know about alternatives. I loved using it when it worked, but that was more a case of "I liked Linux" than anything specific about Redhat.

    I just ran into a lot of little problems over the course of using it. One was the kernel version*, but I also got to enjoy rpm hell and dealing with redhat installing and auto-starting every damn service possible. The security issues were what pushed me to evaluate other distros, and I ended up settling on Debian (potato).

    Debian at the time had its own share of problems, but its problems taught me more about Linux**, and once it was running it was rock-solid and secure; while Redhat's problems just taught me about redhat's problems.

    I'd heard later on that they largely cleaned up their act, but by then it was too late, especially with the relationship Redhat has with GNOME, not-invented-here, and dev attitudes. Poettering, of pulseaudio and systemd infamy, works for Redhat, among others, and everything has this stink of "we didn't make it so it's wrong". There's always been this combativeness on the GNOME side that I didn't like.

    I remember multiple instances of non-GNOME/RH/gtk devs implementing features months, years before them, and everyone accepting them as de-facto standards...and then when the GNOME/RH crew decided they needed that feature, they reimplemented it themselves, refused to consider the existing version, and then demanded everybody else follow suit. If that sounds familiar, it should. This shit bothers me because, while I mostly use KDE now, I've historically been a frequent WM/DE switcher, so every time GNOME does that, it makes life inconvenient for every user of every other option.

    What we're seeing with systemd being being foisted on everyone is just more of the same old. Even if sysv-init is considered broken and in need of replacement (arguable), the fix isn't an init that gets it tentacles into every part of your system. There are other inits available, have been for years; why not find one that looks promising, try to improve its weak areas, and go from there? Why do you want to reimplement every part of the OS inside the init? Maybe they want the system to panic more often so you can see those sweet, sweet boot times.

    Also, yes, the bit about binary log formats is true. Not just that, systemd itself corrupts the logs sometimes, and they flagged the bug WONTFIX because it's considered a non-problem. Their view is that systemd just rotates out the logfile if it becomes corrupted, so who cares, notabug, go away. They even take this same sort of arrogant attitude with the kernel devs, which resulted in Kay Sievers (the udev guy, another systemd maker) getting told off by Linus over it. The gist of it was that Kay got told to fuck off for having busted code and then demanding the kernel devs change things to accomodate bad systemd designs.

    At least Debian hasn't completely forced systemd on me yet. Parts of it are required, but there's a systemd-shim package that lets you retain your non-systemd init without the other parts of systemd complaining. I use it and keep the old sysv one. I'd rather not deal with systemd at all, it doesn't seem mature enough yet, and I'd prefer another system instead, but it's a good-enough compromise for now. If we're lucky, it will end up like pulseaudio: Poettering will get bored, find a new project, everybody will come in behind him and clean up his shit, and it will be mostly usable and still optional. I'm still happily running a pulse-free system without problems. :)

    --

    * I know Wikipedia says RH5 had a 2.0 kernel, but I recall it having both and, for whatever reason, I ended up with the 1.2 kernel in my install.

    ** I went through the debian installer probably a dozen times before I got a working system and learned a lot about the kernel, partitioning, etc.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2