[CentOS] Centos 6 Update?

Wed Apr 20 19:29:07 UTC 2011
Ian Murray <murrayie at yahoo.co.uk>

> 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.

I was just trying to be fair, otherwise I get flamed. 
> > As for the other side of  the point of view, please refer to JH's response to 
> > comment. I'll  paraphrase for you: You can still take it or leave it.
> 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.

Totally agree, but I don't see it changing any time soon.

> 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."

My big beef has always been that the website and project name suggest one thing 
(i.e. enterprise ready), when the reality is quiet different. I think Zonker got 
that one spot on. My suggest to the devs is to change the name and update the 
website and then there is no pretense. Name change will never happen, though, as 
it is a valued "brand" now. I bet you if you did a rebuild off of CentOS, they 
would make you take out all references just like RH do.

> 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.
> 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.

I have it black and white in a private email from JH that he would never give me 
sufficient information to start a competing rebuild.

I have long since concluded that the devs do it for their own reasons and 
certainly not for any altruistic reasons.

> // Brian Mathis
> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/centos@centos.org/msg69365.html
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS  mailing list
> CentOS at centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos