Red Hat Summit: Overview and Reflections

The topics from last week's Red Hat Summit, and what they might mean for the future of the open-source revolution.
Break-Out Sessions

The keynote talks were all good, but the breakout sessions were much better. Most of them were practical talks on how to get more out Linux and related software. For instance, one session by Bret McMillan focused on how to use Red Hat Network (RHN) to keep servers up-to-date. There was another session on tracking server performance with RHN, given by Nick Hansen. One can use RHN to monitor system usage and to improve server performance, including not only hardware and network related services but also application performance--Apache, MySQL and so on. RHN also includes an interface for setting up regular expressions for log file monitoring. RHN either provides status information in a Web interface or sends an e-mail to the systems administrator for services that exceed certain levels set by the sysadmin. A session on the various features of the FireFox Web browser was given by Chris Aillon of Mozilla. This included not only giving us some tips on its use but also a discussion of the implementation of CSS3 Selectors; the latest version supports 85% of them. Another session was conducted by Dan Williams on getting cool stuff from and how to integrate it with other applications. For instance, with the beta 2.0 version of a document can interface with a MySQL database.

Figure 3. Douglas Shakshober

The sessions mentioned above were only a few from the Desktop track and the Application Development track. Five other tracks were on the schedule for the Summit: OS Technologies, Clustering & Virtualization, Systems Management, Business and Security & Identity Management. The OS Technologies sessions, such as the one given by Larry Woodman and Douglas Shakshober on "System Performance Tuning", along with some of the Security track sessions were packed and quite informative.

Personal Reflections

While attending Red Hat Summit as well as LinuxWorld Expo in Boston a few months ago and a couple of other open-source conferences this year, I couldn't help but notice how the face of Linux is changing. When I started with Linux over eight years ago, talks about Linux were given by guys who looked geeky, nerdy or whatever label you want to put on them. It seems that Linux has grown to become the concern of big corporations, and the keynote speakers aren't guys in need of a haircut and some time in the sun. Instead, the keynote speakers are top executives wearing expensive suits or business casual clothing, all speaking in a very professional manner. I don't know if this change is good or bad, but I'm wondering if Linux belongs to us any more.

It's wonderful that Linux is well received and has been growing in success. However, I'm see huge companies, such as IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Novell and others, trying to take control of Linux and open-source software for their benefit. Of course, whether that's actually possible if debatable. The community created Linux out of simple ideas and intellectual passion. The big software companies tried to ignore it for years until it could no longer be ignored. Now, they're trying to direct it. For instance, frustrated with the haphazard progress of the various GUI desktops, Red Hat scooped up some of the volunteer developers of the GNOME desktop and gave them full-time jobs developing GNOME based on the needs of Red Hat's target markets and on its schedule. Admittedly, this has produced some great results. However, one has to wonder how much the herding and corralling of open-source developers helps and hurts the future of open source. Red Hat seems to be second-guessing themselves on this strategy by setting up Fedora in the hopes that the enthusiasm from the community from years past will take hold again--to their benefit, of course.

When I sit through the keynote speeches at these conferences, it amazes me how these top executives can come up with the most bizarre looking graphs and charts to explain the open-source development trend thus far, thereby attempting to predict accurately where it's heading. These executives seem to be trying to take data they've accumulated on the open-source industry and squeeze it into traditional business models so they can explain it in ways they as business managers can understand. From that, they hope to be able to control or at least to predict future trends. Of course, they're forgetting that the trend didn't occur as the result of careful corporate planning. Instead, it happened over usenets and e-mails and from computer hackers diligently working each night after midnight, obsessed with squashing bugs or adding new features based on their perception of what's cool, not what's profitable.

Linux purists have long been aware of this developing pattern. They regularly guffaw at Red Hat, GNOME and other such commercializations of Linux and GNU software. They stick with Slackware for their Linux distribution, Enlightenment for window management and Emacs for text editing and even word processing. Maybe I'm a little slow, but I'm starting to see their point of view and the validity of it. If the big software companies are to take over the revolution--as implied in Szulik's keynote comments--what will be the results? Will they be what Linus Torvalds set out to achieve 14 years ago? We seem to be long past that point. More importantly, will the many thousands of volunteers that donated their time over the last decade or so have done so in the end to make big corporations richer? Also, if we concede to the overpowering marketing strategies and business savvy of the technology giants, what will become of us? Are we simply to become their employees? Are our opinions in the future to be written on cards to be dropped in company suggestion boxes and thereby ignored? Or, maybe we will merely grumble for a few decades until another Linus Torvalds comes forward and starts a new revolution? I don't know what the answers are, and I don't really know what should or can be done--or if anything needs to be done. I do think, however, that we need to pay attention to what's happening to our revolution, and these are the kinds of questions that should be discussed at a "summit" on Linux--and the answers shouldn't be told to us by corporate executives.

Russell Dyer has written on MySQL and other open-source topics for several magazines, including Linux Journal, over the past three years. He is the author of MySQL in a Nutshell (O'Reilly 2005). He lives and works in New Orleans and can be reached at



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Drinking the water

Anonymous's picture

Come to a Novell conference or a IBM conference and you will simply see things from another perspective. You "drank the Red water" at this conference. Linux is 90% religion.
I've used many Linux distributions since Linus first released a working kernel and the only reason that it's moving the direction it's moving is due to the corporate world pulling it in that direction.
RH is desperate now that there are real companies behind real distributions...they want you to continue drinking their water...which you are. Welcome to Microsoft's world where water is already a commodity that they "make better" all the time and when you want to believe that M$ is not behind'll wake up.

Why are folks always attacking Red Hat?

Anonymous's picture


Too many people, including the author of this article, are out here launching both subtle and not-so-subtle attacks against a company that has done BOATLOADS for Free Software. This recent announcement regarding the Netscape Directory Server code is but one example. I think it's great that they're hiring Free Software hackers and releasing all this code under the GPL. They're a part of our community, not its owner.

Mr. Dyer, you say, above, "For instance, frustrated with the haphazard progress of the various GUI desktops, Red Hat scooped up some of the volunteer developers of the GNOME desktop and gave them full-time jobs developing GNOME based on the needs of Red Hat's target markets and on its schedule. Admittedly, this has produced some great results. However, one has to wonder how much the herding and corralling of open-source developers helps and hurts the future of open source."

I don't see it as hurting FOSS at all. On the contrary, I see it as helping it greatly. RMS spoke of this back in the day when he spoke of how Free Software can indeed feed programmers when people need maintenance done on said Free Software. Guess what? Red Hat, Inc. is one of the "people who need maintenance" on that Free Software. By paying the programmers to hack on that code, they are directly furthering its continued improvement. Red Hat has itself become "that programmer" in that its entire business model is on servicing and maintaining Free Software, just like RMS himself did with Emacs back in the day. Just recently, my firm (a school district) funded a PERL hacker to modify the NMIS network management tool to include authentication and authorization, and I was the driving "management" force behind it. I submit that my doing this does not mean that I "hurt the future of open source."

Additionally, Red Hat is about as much for software patents as the Pope is for worshiping golden calves. They are fighting software patents rather loudly. This, too, is a Good Thing.

Firms like Red Hat that release their code under the GPL like they do are great--wonderful--for us. It is this act that we should continue to encourage. If you're going to knock someone, then knock firms like Microsoft, Sun, and Apple who lobby for software patents and restrictive EULAs. But not Red Hat.

I agree

Dave's picture

They say you have to take the good with the bad. RedHat did as noted "Boatloads" for FOSS. Sure, I don't always agree with things they do/want to do, but I wouldn't kill them off if I could as RMS surely would. It seems to be that some people can't comprehend the meaning compromise for the overall betterment of FOSS. Like RMS's, "It's my way or the highway" crap. If it weren't for companies like RedHat Linux wouldn't be what it is today. Linus would have a real job and would only be working on Linux part-time. Today's Linux wouldn't have the support of the companies that gave Linux RCU and other things. IBM wouldn't be protecting what Linux has become today because it would be SCO verus RedHat and RedHat wouldn't be able to compete with the power house lawyers the Canopy Group brought onboard. Thank you RedHat, IBM, HP, etc, but I still reserve the right to criticize you, but rest assured. I have no intention of trying to kick you out of this game.

I agree!

Anonymous's picture

If you dance with wolves it's likely that you will be eaten! My feeling is that the whole open software community nurish a secret dream of being commercially accepted. I believe that the slogan on the RedHat bottles we got at the summit "free as in water" is a big lie!


You need to come to OLS, it's

Anonymous's picture

You need to come to OLS, it's the geeky conference

Red Hat Summit, not Linux Summit

Anonymous's picture

This is the Red Hat Summit, not the Linux Summit. Of course it's going to reflect the corporate agenda of Red Hat (and if RHAT management is doing its job, the company's customers). Want a vendor-neutral Linux summit that's not run by a corporation, go to or Linux Symposium in Ottawa.

*boggle* GNOME is a "commerci

Anonymous's picture

*boggle* GNOME is a "commercialisation of Linux and GNU" software? Dude, GNOME is the GNU desktop!

Linus' Goals

James Reardon's picture

> If the big software companies are to take over the revolution--as
> implied in Szulik's keynote comments--what will be the results? Will
> they be what Linus Torvalds set out to achieve 14 years ago?

14 years ago Linus set out to have a unix-like operating system on his 386. Nothing more. He accomplished his task.

You're right.

Anonymous's picture

You're right. Linus is a good programmer and a great distributed project manager, but not a "master planner". That's why everybody else used Linux, because YOU supply the master plan. Kind of like how kids would rather play with a a cardboard box than a fancy toy. With the box you make up what it is.

Chris DiBona on wireless at conferences

Anonymous's picture


Patrick Hallinan's picture

As long as Red Hat is releasing code under the GPL their contributions are contributions that (whether driven by business goal or not) belong to everyone. They are making real contributions.

Geek Guide
The DevOps Toolbox

Tools and Technologies for Scale and Reliability
by Linux Journal Editor Bill Childers

Get your free copy today

Sponsored by IBM

8 Signs You're Beyond Cron

Scheduling Crontabs With an Enterprise Scheduler
On Demand
Moderated by Linux Journal Contributor Mike Diehl

Sign up now

Sponsored by Skybot