[CentOS] CentOS for axp and sparc arch (info)
Bryan J. Smith
thebs413 at earthlink.net
Thu Nov 3 20:33:00 UTC 2005
Pasi Pirhonen <upi at iki.fi> wrote:
> I have initiated discussion about arch specific list at
> least twice among out core people to no avail, so i did
> make something i can do about it and created few list on
> host that i do admin myself.
> The reason for this is that this list is far too high
> traffic for most of discussion. I've personally received
> questions about arch specific lists as this is just too
> high traffic and people has just unsubscribed from this.
> I don't make any promises about how long those lists are
> hosted, but i try to keep those forever.
> Hope this makes some progress on discussion about problems
> with these 'out of mainstream' arches.
Since I've discussed this with many people off-list, I might
as well post it on-list. I'm writing a FAQ first, which is a
You see, given the traffic and the common complaints about
non-CentOS and, what I call, more "practies" questions, I've
toyed with the idea of creating a "Sun Managers"/"Linux
Managers"-like "Enterprise Linux Managers" ("ELManagers" for
short) list. For those who have never heard of Sun or Linux
Managers, understand it's a "reply to poster (not list)" type
of list. In other words, someone posts a question, then
people send responses _off-list_, then the original poster
absorbs all that info, tries things, etc... and then posts a
"SUMMARY" of what they found out.
This approach does several things:
1. Removes the ettique issue _entirely_
2. Cuts down on the volume, massively
3. Completely avoids the "my way dammit" tangents (no one
responds on-list except the original poster with the SUMMARY)
4. Forces the original poster to learn/try, not just wish
(so they are seriously looking for an answer when they ask)
5. Builds a knowledge base of common Q&A -- the biggie!
The key to starting such is a good, detailed FAQ with a lot
of things addresses. Then that FAQ is revisited and
augmented with newer information from summaries and repeat
questions. In fact, rule #1 of the "Managers" type list is
to check for the answer in the FAQ -- including where to go
for general questions better served by other groups (e.g.,
DNS, Directory Services, Samba, etc...).
Most of all, it would *NOT* replace this CentOS list. In
fact, it would alleviate a lot of the non-CentOS questions.
My primary focus is to create a group that pools a lot of the
overlap between RHEL and CentOS (as well as the looser ties
to Fedora Core), and give a common area for general questions
to not only be asked, but to build SUMMARIES and, eventually,
a Q&A pool from. God knows we see some of the same questions
come up and up again on this list (among others), and I think
this list could be augmented by a off-list response /
Summary-only "Managers" list like this "ELManagers" I have
I'm still writing the FAQ, but I could use a lot of input.
If anyone is interested in discussing more, please contact me
off-list. I probably won't get to this until the weekend,
but I definitely am looking for input (just didn't know how
to approach this before). Thanx for the consideration in
P.S. Why not just use LinuxManagers? It's too broad IMHO.
We could really use a [Red Hat] Enterprise Linux focused
"Managers" list that would be much lower traffic (let along a
lot lower than the Red Hat lists ;-), a growing knowledgebase
of common Q&A (especially non-CentOS questions), etc... But
again, I need to get the initial FAQ finished before even
creating the list.
Bryan J. Smith | Sent from Yahoo Mail
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org | (please excuse any
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ | missing headers)
More information about the CentOS