[CentOS] Centos 6 Update?

[John R. Dennison]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:18:21AM -0400, Brian Mathis wrote:
> 
> No.  News reporting is about picking up and distilling the sentiment
> of what's going on.  The article has done that.  It doesn't have to be
> a complete factual research project with totally "fair and balanced"
> chances for everyone to have their say.  If the Devs had responded,
> that would have been nice, but not a requirement.

The only sentiment picked up on was that of a loud, minuscule and
irrelevant fraction of the user base from this and the -devel mailing
lists.  He went with the loudest group of whiners he could find.

> It doesn't matter how many times you say it, it's still wrong.  JH's
> responses are absolutely out of line and if I were KB I would be
> seriously sitting down with him to have a chat about his attitude.  He
> doesn't seem to realize that telling people to f*ck off is not
> acceptable behavior, no matter who you are or what you do.

It's perfectly acceptable when it's the same vocal few over and over
again.  Matter of fact, I commend him on the restraint he's shown so
far.  It's a point of fact that some people are too thick-skulled to
understand any other way; tact doesn't always work - at times you need
to be brutally honest and blunt.

> It doesn't matter if you provide something "for free", because it's
> not free.  Everyone who uses CentOS invests significant time and
> energy into it.  Choosing CentOS was based on claims on the web site,
> and the promise of an open alternative to Redhat, not "an open
> alternative when we get around to it, and by the way, just be happy we
> deem it worthy to give you anything at all."

What caliber of firearm is pointed at your skull keeping you here?

By the way, anyone that makes a business decision on what OS to use to
support their business requirements based solely on the claims on a web
page has other problems; as does the management team that went along
with it.

> The attitudes against any user who has a question about releases
> significantly undermines the project and is a slap in the face to
> everyone who has chosen to support and proselytize CentOS throughout
> the years.  The idea that the Devs are the only ones who do any "real"
> work on the project is complete BS.  It was the *users* who put all
> the hard work into implementing CentOS and building up the usage
> numbers, not JH and the CentOS project Devs.

Oh please. 

> Also, based on this post where JH throws around the numbers [1], one
> can only assume that the real reason behind keeping the dev process
> closed is to maintain the egos of those on the inside -- since all
> avenues of logic seem to have been exhausted.

But yet... here you are.

This begs the question:

Why are you still here?  No, really.  Why?  You've nothing good to say.
Ever.  Do you honestly think that the continue crap spewing off your
fingers endears you to the CentOS team?  Do you think they care?  Do you
think you're important to them?  Let me disabuse you of something:  the
answer to all 3 items above is "no".  As difficult as it may be for you
to accept the truth is you're irrelevant.  As I've pointed out in the
past, you, like the other whiners and complainers, are not important in
the least.  You're a teeny tiny fraction of the overall CentOS user base
and if you were to migrate your boxes right now tonight to RHEL or SL or
any other distro that takes your fancy you will not be missed.  Do you
think the loss of your continued crying, bitching and complaining is
going to cause anyone any loss of sleep?  Why don't you do yourself and
everyone else a favor and just move on to some flavor of linux that you
don't dislike as much as you do CentOS?



						John
-- 
Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well-being of
a person or animal is at stake.  Society's punishments are small compared
to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way.

-- Martin Luther King Jr. (1929-1968), civil-rights leader
-------------- 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/attachments/20110420/80f59781/attachment.sig>