[CentOS] CentOS for axp and sparc arch (info)

[Bryan J. Smith]

Pasi Pirhonen <upi at iki.fi> wrote:
> Hi,
> I have initiated discussion about arch specific list at
> least twice among out core people to no avail, so i did
> make something i can do about it and created few list on
> host that i do admin myself.
> The reason for this is that this list is far too high
> traffic for most of discussion. I've personally received
> questions about arch specific lists as this is just too
> high traffic and people has just unsubscribed from this.
> http://upi.iki.fi/mailman/listinfo/
> I don't make any promises about how long those lists are
> hosted, but i try to keep those forever.
> Hope this makes some progress on discussion about problems
> with these 'out of mainstream' arches.

Since I've discussed this with many people off-list, I might
as well post it on-list.  I'm writing a FAQ first, which is a
crucial pre-requisite.

You see, given the traffic and the common complaints about
non-CentOS and, what I call, more "practies" questions, I've
toyed with the idea of creating a "Sun Managers"/"Linux
Managers"-like "Enterprise Linux Managers" ("ELManagers" for
short) list.  For those who have never heard of Sun or Linux
Managers, understand it's a "reply to poster (not list)" type
of list.  In other words, someone posts a question, then
people send responses _off-list_, then the original poster
absorbs all that info, tries things, etc... and then posts a
"SUMMARY" of what they found out.

This approach does several things:  
1.  Removes the ettique issue _entirely_
2.  Cuts down on the volume, massively
3.  Completely avoids the "my way dammit" tangents (no one
responds on-list except the original poster with the SUMMARY)
4.  Forces the original poster to learn/try, not just wish
(so they are seriously looking for an answer when they ask)
5.  Builds a knowledge base of common Q&A -- the biggie!

The key to starting such is a good, detailed FAQ with a lot
of things addresses.  Then that FAQ is revisited and
augmented with newer information from summaries and repeat
questions.  In fact, rule #1 of the "Managers" type list is
to check for the answer in the FAQ -- including where to go
for general questions better served by other groups (e.g.,
DNS, Directory Services, Samba, etc...).

Most of all, it would *NOT* replace this CentOS list.  In
fact, it would alleviate a lot of the non-CentOS questions. 
My primary focus is to create a group that pools a lot of the
overlap between RHEL and CentOS (as well as the looser ties
to Fedora Core), and give a common area for general questions
to not only be asked, but to build SUMMARIES and, eventually,
a Q&A pool from.  God knows we see some of the same questions
come up and up again on this list (among others), and I think
this list could be augmented by a off-list response /
Summary-only "Managers" list like this "ELManagers" I have
been pondering.

I'm still writing the FAQ, but I could use a lot of input. 
If anyone is interested in discussing more, please contact me
off-list.  I probably won't get to this until the weekend,
but I definitely am looking for input (just didn't know how
to approach this before).  Thanx for the consideration in
advance.

-- Bryan

P.S.  Why not just use LinuxManagers?  It's too broad IMHO. 
We could really use a [Red Hat] Enterprise Linux focused
"Managers" list that would be much lower traffic (let along a
lot lower than the Red Hat lists ;-), a growing knowledgebase
of common Q&A (especially non-CentOS questions), etc...  But
again, I need to get the initial FAQ finished before even
creating the list.

-- 
Bryan J. Smith                | Sent from Yahoo Mail
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org     |  (please excuse any
http://thebs413.blogspot.com/ |   missing headers)