[CentOS-devel] CentOS-4.9 SRPMS

Sun Feb 20 00:44:54 UTC 2011
DJA <dallen at codermotor.com>

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.