I'm giving CentOS Stream another try, this time the 9 Beta, and also in GNOME Boxes instead of bare metal.

So far:

* Install was uneventful (It helps to be familiar with Anaconda).

* While the "DVD" image is huge (~8GB), the installation is small. I'd rather make the choice beteween Flatpaks and RPMs for my applications, so this is a good move.

* Looks great (GNOME 40). If you can manage to get the apps you need between CentOS, EPEL, Copr and Flatpaks, this is a great workstation.

All of this hinges on how Red Hat "treats" CentOS Stream 9. If it's a true upstream, and security fixes go to Stream first (and not weeks late), the distro has the potential to be a success -- not just as a gateway for contributions back to RHEL but as a usable, secure and stable operating system.

Follow

I felt bad for Red Hat employees who were put in the position of defending Stream 8, which has a strange update model that is upstream for some things and downstream for security fixes.

Right now I'm trying to fondly remember the Red Hatters who said "Stream 9 will be better, trust us," more than those who said, "Stream 8 is FINE. Now shut up and piss off." (These are paraphrases ... )

The more CentOS tries to be like Fedora from a community standpoint, the better.

I'm VERY happy with Fedora Silverblue at the moment. I would love for CentOS to experiment with the same kind of thing.

@passthejoe The fact that Hyperscale exists and you can do stuff like btrfs on it, due to CentOS SIG *community* contributions is huge, IMO.

@passthejoe Red Hat CoreOS is probably the closest thing, but unlike Fedora CoreOS, RHCOS is specifically for hosting OpenShift.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Ruby.social

A Mastodon instance for Rubyists & friends