[CentOS-devel] CentOS-4.9 SRPMS
DJA
dallen at codermotor.com
Sun Feb 20 00:44:54 UTC 2011
On 02/19/2011 03:58 PM, John R. Dennison wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 03:27:56PM -0800, Richard McClellan wrote:
>> 1. Johnny Hughes, you would do CentOS well to mind your words. Or
>> better yet, don't respond to threads asking about the process or
>> release status. Instead, take half a day and write up a description
>> of it.
>
> He already went over the build process in more than enough
> detail to permit someone outside the project to do so.
I think Mr. McClellan was suggesting a bit more documentation on the
website. Not everyone interested in CentOS is necessarily going to
subscribe to this list. It was a reasonable suggestion in that context.
>> 2. The CentOS process is opaque and secretive. It may indeed be very
>> complex with justifiable restrictions over who can contribute at what
>> level, but the process should be described somewhere. This would also
>> help impartial observers/users of CentOS understand why things take as
>> long as they do. The process and team appear to be dysfunctional to
>> the point that using CentOS may be a risk.
>
> Secretive? Just today there have been postings with enough
> information to permit someone familiar with development
> processes in general to do their own build. Do you need
> something along the lines of "Step 1: Collect and download to a
> staging area the necessary source RPMs from upstream."
> hand-holding?
Again, easily-gotten docs on the subject (aside from a dev list) would
be very helpful and maybe cut down on at least some of the dialog here
in the last couple of days (some of it unnecessarily heated).
>> 3. A lot of people are frustrated with the level and type of
>> communication from the CentOS inner circle. Increasing the level of
>> communication--including release status--and politeness would be good
>> for CentOS.
>
> This is arguably true to some extent, but by no means a
> necessary occurrence.
As a new subscriber and potentially a new user doing research before
implementation, I sincerely hope so.
>> A few days on this list was enough to give me a fresh interest in
>> finding an alternative to CentOS.
>
> I hear Redhat would be happy to sell you a set of support
> subscriptions. Of course, you would be required to pay for
> them.
That is a very condescending, specious, and frankly rude reply, and does
nothing to further your argument. your work, or the recommendation of
your distribution. In any case, I have no doubt that we would not get
similar disdain from Redhat to what was a very civil customer comment.
>> With that I bid you all good luck and thanks for five year of CentOS.
>
> Please don't let the door get scuffed on your way out :)
Smiley or not, that was very Eric Cartman of you. I can only hope that
such unprofessionalism is not indicative of the quality of either CentOS
itself, or of the mindset of its support staff-at-large.
I have to also question whether deciding to choose to use CentOS is
going to come with serious future regrets.
Best Regards, DJA.
More information about the CentOS-devel
mailing list