It’s only a proof of concept at the moment and I don’t know if it will see mass adoption but it’s a step in the right direction to ending reliance on US-based Big Tech.

  • kokolores@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why Fedora? Sorry, but there are so many European options, it makes no sense to build a European house on an American basement.

    • mlg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Probably since it’s the main redhat upstream and they want the advantage of already widespread usage.

      Although at that point why not OpenSUSE for the same reason you mentioned.

          • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            34 minutes ago

            Regular release distros do security updates, backported if needed. Rolling release means introducing unknown security bugs until they are found and fixed. To me, the whole dilemma between regular and rolling is do I want old bugs or new bugs? But the security bugs get fixed on both.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      if you’re not paying it doesn’t really matter. open source belongs to everyone; it’s a disservice to put it in the same bag as, say, a Microsoft or Apple OS.

      plus how far removed is enough? are we going to scrutinize what programming languages were used and where they originated as well?

      • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        Open source is free for everyone, I think the objection is more about an american company being able to directly influence the decisions, operating under US jurisdiction, etc.