I saw “Remove CentOS from Distro” issue and also <a href=http://wiki.freepbx.org/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=19498164&selectedPageVersions=7>latest Wiki changes about FreePBX Distro’s CentOS reference.
At this point I think a coherent change in that Wiki page could be to state:
“Schmooze Linux 6.5 (a CentOS 6.5 respin)”
instead of just writing (bold is mine and it’s here just to make it evident):
“Schmooze Linux 6.5 (Derived from CentOS)”
since the FreePBX Distro is still effectively a CentOS (re)spin (it’s a “(re)spin” because it’s not a “genuine” untouched CentOS distribution, see here).
Given the latest news about CentOS and Red Hat “joining forces” (see above) then, if I didn’t misunderstood above CentOS Trademarks changes, Schmooze developers will let, in a near future, FreePBX Distro to become another direct spin of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (as CentOS was and currently still is) of TUV (The Upstream Vendor, as known as: Red Hat) ceasing to be a (re)spin of CentOS.
We can not call it respin. The example they give is derived from so that is what we are using.
The latest ISOs are already no longer CentOS and we have rebuilt all the installer and anaconda and yum packages to remove all of the CentOS trademark.
Yes, I agree: only the latest (latest = FreePBX Distro 6.12.65-3 and FreePBX Distro 5.211.65-5) ISOs you built aren’t based on a CentOS 6.5’s so they aren’t (re)spins of CentOS 6.5 distribution, this because latest ISOs you rebuilt were built with all system packages rebuilt from sources (provided by RH) with removed Trade Marks/Logos/Bitmaps references (exactly as CentOS did/does in regard with RH EL sources); this means that (only) new ISOs are now directly derived by RH EL 6, isn’t it? …this is what I meant (in other terms this mean that FreePBX Distro is not more based on CentOS but directly from RHEL sources). Right?
It’s clear that before (previous ISOs) were (re)spins of CentOS 6.5 (where the term (re)spin means - to me - not genuine CentOS operative system, it’s like to say “CentOS customized”).
No the upgrade scripts will update your system to the latest which includes removing everything. Regardless we can not use the re-spin. Their example is from derived from.
OK for the upgrade scripts, I agree…but I’m not speaking about “Upgrade Scripts” in particular…even if it’s quite evident that any updated FreePBX Distro updated to 5.211.65-5 will be (from now on) “SHMZ release 6.5 (Final)” and any reference to CentOS is removed.
That’s clear.
I’m trying to understand if there is a relationship between Red Hat’s announcement and the decision of FreePBX Developers to build ISOs (again: from now on) directly using source packages provided by TUV without relying on CentOS any more.
So I try to reformulate my question in a clearer way: will/will not actual FreePBX Distro 5/6 be based directly on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (as the upstream provider of all system’s source packages)?
CentOS on their legal page states now that if you rebuild a ISO basically you can not use their trademark. So we have rectified this based on their legal page. It is still derived from CentOS/Red Hat.
Thanks Tony, that’s quite instructive about what’s happening beneath the surface…I understood that CentOS trademark, logos and whatever else CentOS related are now (after the joint) property of Red Hat and a lot of interesting and detailed discussions are ongoing on users/developers lists either on Fedora or on Scientific Linux. Some are very speculative but others are popping up true deep details about this “joint” and any consequences it’s carrying.
It has been done on FreePBX Distro because it was mandatory for that (CentOS based) distribution (the FreePBX Distro was CentOS based): please, do not confuse the FreePBX Distro with FreePBX.
Tony, as expected when logon to the FreePBX Distro I typed cat /etc/redhat-release
I get:
SHMZ release 6.5 (Final)
Believe me, I have been in this business for a long time enough to have grey hair and it took a long time to get me unconfused.
It is only after “finding” this comment and reading all of the links you refer to (a 30 minutes process) that I understood what was going on. Would it not have been easier to say in redhat_release:
SHMZ release derived from the source code for the CentOS version 6.5 distribution
This is permitted in the CentOS trademark page. This would have saved me a lot of time and would save people a lot of time. Now the collective minds needs to be aware that SHMZ version x.y is based on the source for the CentOS x.y distribution. What if in the future the version for SHMZ and the CentOS distribution it is based are different. How will one keep track?
Tony, CentOs never specified what Redhat version their version is based because it is generally know that they are based on the same. Or at least this is what I recall.
In your case, the fact that you included newer RPM in SHMZ version 6.5 than those found in CentOs 6.5 does not mean that you are not based on CentOs 6.5. What I am trying to get at is that if a feature is introduced in CentOs 6.5, that feature albeit improved would also be included in SHMZ 6.5 and telling us you are based on CentOs conveys this information for the person who is involved the first time with SHMZ and FreePBX. All I am saying is that SHMZ OS means nothing to someone new unless one knows this relation. Either you guys make this relation easy to determine or not.
That was all my point and I do not mean to bash anything you guys at Schmooze are doing quite the contrary. Thanks to all of you guys.
That is our point. We are not 100% CentOS backward compatible so something in CentOS we dont want assumed is put into our platform and given how fast Trademark and Copyright policies have changed at RedHat we dont want to use their trademark anywhere in reference to our product or within our product.