On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 18:34 +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote: > Subscribing to centos-devel or starting a SIG or doing a project on > http://projects.centos.org/ does not require *any* invitation and that > is where involvement starts. Well, it even does start on a lower level - > by supporting other users on IRC, forums or mailing lists. Which also > does not require an invitation. Neither does writing up documentation on > the Wiki. the problem here is that i thought i saw where a person had to have permission for these things such as the wiki. when some asks a question in irc which may be a general linux question, should they be told that centos doesnt support it therefore go away? the impression here is that if its not a centos rpm, then we want nothing to do with it. while that may be true in fact, i think this is wrong inherently with the mission of centos to tell someone this. i understand it gets old to sit and watch these kind of questions all the time, maybe someone needs a break then. > > Access to packages preliminary to release or access to build hosts - > that requires an invitation. But that is on top of the involvement > process. understood. > > > > If CentOS noticed a huge decline in users they might be concerned about > > > this. They haven't; you're probably the only one I've heard bringing > > > up this issue and honestly it sounds like you were the cause of the > > > problem. > > > > that may be your perception. perhaps you would want to look at the logs > > so you would know. > > Others probably had another perception - and I think that today might > have been just "the icing on the cake". this is unfortunate and a failure of this type of communication. > > and users do not react well to being told rudely 'it will be ready when > > its ready', that is just rude. > > But it will only be ready when it is ready. If there would be a known > date or even week, that would have been announced. But from the > beginning on people have been told that it normally takes three to four > weeks for CentOS to follow up on a release from upstream. And I don't > see anything rude in stating exactly that - it is ready when it is > ready. And the time frame within that "is ready" will happen is still > the same as in Tim's blog post on planet.centos.org. > > What is rude about that? its seen as a non-definitive answer to a question that would normally ask for more detail. i.e., a copout. > > > i do not perceive it as a paying customer, and i was not the one that > > brought that up. now that it has been brought up, what is the mission of > > CentOS ? > > To provide people with a free (as in beer, RHEL and CentOS are also free > as in free speech) Enterprise Linux Distribution. I think that counts as > goal No. 1. does this include support in IRC? or mailing lists and forums only? (just curious) notice my criticism here is the IRC channels only and the responses there. > > > > This is open source etiquette. It differs from business etiquette > > > where you are more than welcoem to berate and yell and holler about > > > things because you're paying someone a lot of money. > > > > the etiquette is rudeness to promote open source? is this what you are > > saying? > > No. But people rather do work on stuff so that it does get ready than to > market around it and promise stuff that won't happen. > > Ralph > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20080605/788dd750/attachment-0005.html>