On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 7:05 PM, PatrickD Garvey <patrickdgarveyt at gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Brian Stinson <bstinson at ksu.edu> wrote: > >> On Dec 23 17:05, PatrickD Garvey wrote: >> > Thank you for your contribution to the discussion. I'm glad you appear >> to >> > understand this was not directed at you personally. >> >> Certainly no offense was taken here. I'm thankful for people like you >> who are looking out for understandability. >> >> > >> > I'm a retired System Administrator. Part of my job was being a >> professional >> > paranoid about user credentials. At most of the companies where I >> worked, >> > loss or sharing of the company phone book was a firing offense. I >> imagine >> > that is the source of our difference of opinion. >> >> With my documentation writer hat on, I can say that I wrote my page that >> way out of convenience (rather hastily I might add :) and in the absence >> of official style guidelines it was easiest to copy directly from the >> screen. Perhaps we can adopt some of the guidelines suggested downthread >> by Karsten that will make things more clear. In the meantime I'll work >> on generalizing the centpkg page. >> >> --Brian >> > > Excellent! Thank you. > > One page at a time is as fast as we can work. > That's interesting. It appears this exchange is having trouble reaching the centos-docs archive even though http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/2014-December/005463.html has been archived. I wonder what could have happened. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/attachments/20141224/6e1fbb82/attachment-0006.html>