on 10-16-2008 3:08 AM William L. Maltby spake the following: > On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 22:54 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote: >> Karanbir Singh wrote: >>> And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further encourage >>> such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list. >> Also, all comments are welcome! >> >> If there is a general feeling that this would help, then we will go >> ahead and setup the new list in the next few days. > > I think this is not a good solution. I've read all the other posts in > this thread and there are a lot of good points. But... > > Since I've been on the list, it has *always* appeared to me to be not > CentOS-specific. It rather appears to be mostly admin-centric. Both > experienced and inexperienced users have posted, been helped, helped > others. It has been, fortunately, mostly related to CentOS in that the > posters are trying to do something on CentOS, not BSD, UNIX, .... It > should, of course, remain so. Nevertheless, the primary focus seems > towards administration, not CentOS. > > The "enforcement" of "CentOSicity" has been sporadic and arbitrary. The > "sporadic" part has allowed this to become a very informative, usually > friendly and productive tool. It reflects, IMO, the nature of its > constituency. > > The "arbitrary" part has raised my hackles, even though I'm not the > target (usually). "Got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning" > usually crosses my mind. > > My feeling is that what has been generally tolerated on the list should > continue: help with mail setup, wifi doesn't work, recommend <insert > your hardware here>, php, browser problems, raid, file systems, ... you > can see that very little is CentOS. But usually it is at least on a > CentOS system. > > Because CentOS "just works" for so many, this list would really have > very few posts that are on topic: upgrade 4.x->5.x broke my system (read > the archives, that's not recommended), I can't get my wifi to work on > 5.x (that hardware is too new - go get the driver from...), etc. > > A great number of these would be administration problems, not CentOS > problems, and also would spawn tangential threads. They would then be > referred to the new list, which would now look like this one used to > look. Cross postings would begin to occur as many topics would be > difficult to initially categorize. Is it a CentOS problem or a wetware > problem? > > My recommendation is that this list continue as it has, with the > exception of the arbitrary enforcement of "CentOSicity". This should be > either consistently enforced, reducing the utility and population of > this list, or only enforced that you must be using/administering/setting > up... a CentOS system. > > This will acknowledge the nature of an "enterprise class" user, continue > to support the growth of CentOS, aid the user in innumerable ways, ... > > For those who want a much narrower scope of topics, start lists for > them. From the day I first subscribed, the reality has been that this > list has been: > > - technologies > - best practices > - deployment strategies and tools > - management strategies and tools > > to quote you, along with the other things I've mentioned. Local filters, > <DEL>, etc. can handle the chores for those that want a very narrow > view. > > MHO I have to second that. If people get to the one on one point that I see soo often, they really should be taking it off-list anyway.. IE .. If two men have a disagreement at a pub, they should go "outside". If others want to "watch" they can go off list with them and the combatants can "reply-all" and keep the thread going as long as they wish. The back and forth "sword fighting" on list just gets the admins involved, and starts another fight somewhere else. If the admins are spanking the list members, they have less of their sparse time left for other things that they might have been getting done or trying to get done. Now I am done, and off this thread.... If any body wants a piece of me, lets go outside!!! ;-D -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't!!!! -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 250 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20081016/046311fb/attachment-0004.sig>