GlyphJun 29, 2023
I do agree with Red Hat that we ought to ensure that the people who *really* make open source software need to be fairly compensated
Show threadJames BennettJun 29, 2023

@glyph I really dislike these takes, given that RH has in fact contributed a ton to the software they include in their distributions and to the Linux ecosystem as a whole.

I also worry what this does to ongoing conversations about sustainable OSS maintainership if our knee-jerk reaction is to say we expect to get not just the software but also the ongoing maintenance gratis and that complainers are to be shunned and mocked.

Show threadNoah KJun 29, 2023
@ubernostrum @glyph I don't think anyone is saying Red Hat doesn't deserve to get paid, I've even literally said that. But I think it's very fair to point out the hypocrisy of Red Hat standing on the shoulders of (free) giants and saying "this far but no further”. _Everyone_ involved should be getting paid but I see no reason that Red Hat's efforts are of a different kind that is more deserving than everyone else, so their current position comes off as rent seeking rather than community boosting
Show threadJames BennettJun 29, 2023

@coderanger @glyph My issue is with all the hot takes premised on RH being a mere repackager. Which they are not.

I don’t know what the right way to try to get paid for a service like RHEL is, but I’m tired of takes that pretend there’s nothing of value added by RH.

Show threadGlyphJun 29, 2023

@ubernostrum @coderanger I'm clearly being a little reductive here, but if you want some nuance:

I'm reacting to https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/red-hats-commitment-open-source-response-gitcentosorg-changes which is a tone-deaf mess of a statement. There's a lot to dislike, but I am annoyed specifically at the claim that Red Hat rebuilding *my* code largely unmodified by integrating it into their build toolchain is "adding value", but other people rebuilding *their* code largely unmodified by integrating it into their toolchains is *not* adding value.

Red Hat’s commitment to open source: A response to the git.centos.org changes

More about Red Hat's decision to make CentOS Stream the primary repository for RHEL sources.

Show threadGlyphJun 29, 2023
@ubernostrum @coderanger I didn't even know about AlmaLinux or Rocky a few days ago, but it seems clear that there's a community there, they have their own infrastructure, their own testing, etc. Rocky is a B corp, which implies a non-trivial amount of publicly beneficial value is being provided there
Show threadGlyphJun 29, 2023
@ubernostrum @coderanger when @Migueldeicaza described this as a "reddit moment" he hit the nail on the head. It's not like Reddit does *nothing*, either. They run a big website. They have a lot of computers! But there's a lot of moralizing language in their statements around getting paid for labor. Red Hat / Reddit think "I made this" with respect to all the content they're putting their arms around with their infrastructure. The infra is valuable! But its value doesn't supersede the content.
Show threadJames Bennett

@glyph @coderanger

My issue with this specific case is that Red Hat isn't just providing "infrastructure" or whatever. They are an actual real honest-to-goodness genuine producer of and contributor to Free and Open Source software, and also a paying employer of contributors and maintainers in the F/OSS world. And a really big and significant one, in their niche. The fact that their primary niche isn't *our* primary niche doesn't change that.

And like 95% of the complaints about their changes are from people who used one of the repackaged distros because they wanted the (perceived) improved stability/quality that Red Hat provided, but without paying what Red Hat charges. And as I understand it they still have free or cheap options for open-source projects that need them.

So I really really think that no matter how much someone dislikes RH or IBM as companies, or dislikes corporate statements, the reductive hot takes are a bad look. And I still don't know the right way for RH to make a business out of what they do, but I still think it hurts all OSS maintainers to just reflexively attack them for trying.

Jun 30, 2023 at 12:03amWeb
Show threadJason Petersen (he)Jun 30, 2023
@ubernostrum why devote so much effort to running interference for them? Who cares if it is reductive? What is the downside?
Show threadJames BennettJun 30, 2023

@jason Well, for one thing I'm right.

For another, it's not "running interference". If people want to write critiques of the changes, they should do so! I'm just saying that I'm not a fan of the reductive hot takes, and I don't think they accomplish anything useful (in fact, I think they do active harm).

For yet another, I know plenty of people who work for or have worked for Red Hat. They're not faceless corporate drones; they're friends and colleagues, and seeing their hard work reduced to the "I made this" meme, and them dehumanized behind sneering at a corporation, is not something I care much for.

And finally, a big downside is that once you allow reductive angry hot takes at unsympathetic targets, you are on the way to allowing them at what previously would have been sympathetic targets. That's happened too much already, and I'd prefer it not happen any more, thanks.

Show threadJason Petersen (he)Jun 30, 2023
@ubernostrum maybe they should quit then
Show threadGlyphJun 30, 2023
@ubernostrum @jason upon reflection I stand by the hot take here. In some ways, yes, RH has been a good corporate citizen and contributed to the commons. And when they do, by all means, praise them. But in their statement they *specifically said* that their system was and is made by their own “late nights” as if their entire business model is not *made possible* by the asymmetry of their contributions. If there weren’t already an ecosystem to package, there would be nothing to contribute to
Show threadGlyphJun 30, 2023

@ubernostrum @jason red hat exists in the first place because their model is capturing and harnessing the chaotic commons of free software, making it legible to the processes and structure of business and corporations. that doesn’t have to be inherently predatory or exploitative. It can be symbiotic. But it does require the acknowledgement of and respect for that other effort, especially in moralizing screeds written to persuade.

There’s no two ways about it: they fucked this up.

Show threadJason Petersen (he)Jun 30, 2023

@glyph it feels like Reddit, it feels like Twitter, etc etc.

A common good arose, they built a nice thing with and around it, and now stick up a wall and say “we did the stuff in here”

I knew people at Twitter, and I’m sure there are good people at Reddit. I’ve done RPM packaging and had to interface with employees while up streaming; they’re good, helpful folk.

It doesn’t lessen the grossness of what the parent company does. Agreed on all points.