[CentOS-devel] CentOS-4.9 SRPMS

Sun Feb 20 01:54:32 UTC 2011
John R. Dennison <jrd at gerdesas.com>

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 04:44:54PM -0800, DJA wrote:
> 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.

	And I maintain that it *is* documented, this isn't the first
	time that this discussion has been had, only the most recent;
	and it's now archived for posterity.  There is a community wiki
	at http://wiki.centos.org; I doubt that there would be any
	issue with requesting access to document this if you, or anyone
	else, feel the need.

> 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.

	Not "my" work, nor "my" distribution.  I am not a member of the
	CentOS development team, I have no more or less standing in the
	community than anyone else.  And I'm not sure I care if you
	believe it to be condescending or not.  I say what I mean and in
	this instance if you want an alternative to CentOS go to the
	source and get it from Redhat after you pay them for a support
	entitlement.  There is no other EL alternative that bears
	mentioning; SL is not true EL, neither is OL.  So your choices
	are somewhat limited.  And as far as disdain?  Tell you what,
	you go ask Redhat for a release schedule or documentation on
	their buildroots or build-order or frankly anything else and see
	where it gets you.  I just don't get this whole documentation
	issue.  Why should CentOS be held to different standards than

> 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 don't care if he stays or goes.  If he wants to go, then
	go.  Same for anyone else.  No one has a gun to anyone else's
	head forcing them to use the distribution.  And if you liken my
	comments to the "support staff-at-large" you *really* need to
	reconsider.  I don't speak for the project in any way, shape or
	form nor do I represent the support staff-at-large in any way;
	I speak for myself only.

> I have to also question whether deciding to choose to use CentOS is 
> going to come with serious future regrets.

	That's a decision only you can make for yourself and/or your
	organization.  However you may wish to weigh it against the fact
	that CentOS has been around for many years and has *millions* of
	installed systems around the world; it's not going anywhere
	anytime soon.  And as much as you may believe otherwise, there
	are a large number of volunteers that freely offer their time to
	assist others on the mailing lists, IRC and the forums.  The
	temperaments run the range from those as gruff as I am to those
	that are willing to hold your hand as you walk across the street
	and wipe your nose after you sneeze.  I've been in support and
	managed support departments in the past and have been involved
	with many projects throughout the years and I can honestly say
	that the volunteers for CentOS are, by and large, some of the
	best around.

	But at the end of the day that's all we are, volunteers.  And
	I, for one, don't promise to make your world smell like roses.
	I will, however, do whatever I can to assist you with whatever
	problems you may be having.  What's more important?  Getting
	your issues resolved or having a warm fuzzy in the pit of your
	stomach?  The .sig at the end of this mail is time-tested and

Much of what looks like rudeness in hacker circles is not intended to give
offense. Rather, it's the product of the direct, cut-through-the-bullshit
communications style that is natural to people who are more concerned about
solving problems than making others feel warm and fuzzy.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20110219/a426d45c/attachment-0005.sig>