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.