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 Redhat? > 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 true. John -- 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. http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -------------- 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-0007.sig>