On 01/04/2009, Christopher Chan christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote:
Is
OpenSolaris still closely controlled by Sun?
I don't know if Sun still governs OpenSolaris, I know they are very
tight as often new technologies are rolled from OpenSolaris to
Solaris, but OpenSolaris might
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 20:29 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Rainer Duffner wrote:
snip
need it, seemingly) and hardly anybody documents (try to find a man-
page for a hw-driver...)
A driver without a man page is more useful than no driver at all...
And a lot more exciting and dangerous too.
this getting ready for centos 5.4 thread...
i am not following it... yet...
did we time warp and lose 5.3, being trashcanned and now waiting on 5.4?
microsoft didnt buy out the centos faithful did they?
;-
- rh
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS
RobertH wrote:
this getting ready for centos 5.4 thread...
i am not following it... yet...
did we time warp and lose 5.3, being trashcanned and now waiting on 5.4?
microsoft didnt buy out the centos faithful did they?
;-
I'm tired of waiting for 5.4 and moved on to waiting
waiting for 5.5, that is funny...
:-)
heheh, no, really, what happened to 5.3?
-rh
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
on 3-31-2009 8:34 AM Toby Bluhm spake the following:
RobertH wrote:
this getting ready for centos 5.4 thread...
i am not following it... yet...
did we time warp and lose 5.3, being trashcanned and now waiting on 5.4?
microsoft didnt buy out the centos faithful did they?
;-
I'm
:
this getting ready for centos 5.4 thread...
i am not following it... yet...
did we time warp and lose 5.3, being trashcanned and now waiting on 5.4?
microsoft didnt buy out the centos faithful did they?
;-
- rh
___
CentOS mailing list
Jimmy Bradley wrote:
This is just my 2 cents worth. The reason I run Cent OS is
because it just seems to be rock solid stable. That's something I
haven't seen in any of the other distros, or MS Windows.
My computers are my lifeline to my jobs. I get my assignments by
way of my
Brian Mathis wrote:
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009
If you read any of the previous 90 messages, you'd know that
they are talking about ways to plan for the *future* release
of 5.4 and is asking how the community can help to try to
prevent the delays that have happened with 5.3.
Florin Andrei wrote:
Jimmy Bradley wrote:
This is just my 2 cents worth. The reason I run Cent OS is
because it just seems to be rock solid stable. That's something I
haven't seen in any of the other distros, or MS Windows.
My computers are my lifeline to my jobs. I get my
Yes, there are not too many surprises with CentOS. However, debian has
also had a very good reputation for stability - and Ubuntu builds on
that while also providing timely releases.
Please do not subscribe to the notion that ubuntu builds on Debian
stability.
Ubuntu has had
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 08:43 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
Yes, there are not too many surprises with CentOS. However, debian has
also had a very good reputation for stability - and Ubuntu builds on
that while also providing timely releases.
Please do not subscribe to the notion
Ubuntu has had releases with certain key tools broken such as the GNOME
Network configuration tool.
that I believe is an upstream issue that affects all distributions who
have updated GNOME.
Yeah, you are most probably right. I remember being told there was no
maintainer for
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 09:27 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
Ubuntu is fine - if that gives Les what he's looking for, then I say,
great. What's the point of this ongoing discussion anyway?
It looked like Les was exploring the idea of trying something else and I
have been through that
On Mar 31, 2009, at 9:51 PM, Craig White craigwh...@azapple.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 09:27 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
Ubuntu is fine - if that gives Les what he's looking for, then I
say,
great. What's the point of this ongoing discussion anyway?
It looked like Les was
Ross Walker wrote:
Les has been around a long time and certainly is knowledgeable about
many forms of UNIX, Linux, Windows and OS X. He seems to enjoy
fomenting
discussions about what it is that Red Hat does in general that doesn't
suit him but given CentOS philosophy to track upstream as
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009, Craig White wrote:
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 09:27 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
Ubuntu is fine - if that gives Les what he's looking for, then I say,
great. What's the point of this ongoing discussion anyway?
It looked like Les was exploring the idea of trying
Bill Campbell wrote:
Les has been around a long time and certainly is knowledgeable about
many forms of UNIX, Linux, Windows and OS X. He seems to enjoy fomenting
discussions about what it is that Red Hat does in general that doesn't
suit him but given CentOS philosophy to track upstream as
On Mar 31, 2009, at 10:41 PM, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com
wrote:
I always thought Sun would be a better match for Apple to round out
the
client/server mix, but they are from somewhat different planets. Is
OpenSolaris still closely controlled by Sun?
You know I felt the exact
Is
OpenSolaris still closely controlled by Sun?
I don't know if Sun still governs OpenSolaris, I know they are very
tight as often new technologies are rolled from OpenSolaris to
Solaris, but OpenSolaris might have it's own governing body now.
Ha! There are very few non
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 01:50:26PM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
Ray Van Dolson wrote:
Centos (who cares about RHEL) needs a bit more extra work to make it
more useful for desktops. I had to build me own kiosktool rpm for example.
Ahh, yes. RH has pretty much said they're not
Christopher Chan wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Christopher Chan wrote:
start/stop' though from Intrepid onwards I believe. There is no root
account by default.
There is a root account, you just can't access it w/o setting it's password.
Oh you can. sudo -i. Now go away.
I don't have a problem with sudo, I just have a problem with sudo
configurations that make it cake to spawn a root shell.
Good luck guessing the password. (okay, most ubuntu users most probably
don't have a good one)
___
CentOS mailing list
Michael A. Peters wrote:
start/stop' though from Intrepid onwards I believe. There is no root
account by default.
There is a root account, you just can't access it w/o setting it's password.
sudo su -
And as soon as you do set it's password, I highly recommend you then
completely
Ray Van Dolson wrote:
Functional deficiencies here we come:
1) No equivalent to kickstart:
By that I mean, zero support for automated lvm on raid kind of disk
partitioning in the debian-installer
This is a huge issue with SLES. AutoYaST makes me very angry. :-) I
can
Les Mikesell wrote:
Errr, why is it easier to get an admin user's name and password than the
root password?
Because typically you only allow root login via console or an existing
login.
You can brute force a user password (or sniff if the admin is lazy in
how they connect - IE not using
With sudo disabled, the cracker must also have a local exploit that gets
past SELinux. Assuming Ubuntu supports SELinux (does it?)
No, it comes with AppArmor instead.
There are trappings of selinux in Intrepid if not Hardy.
Package: libselinux1
escription: SELinux shared
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Errr, why is it easier to get an admin user's name and password than the
root password?
Because typically you only allow root login via console or an existing
login.
I don't see how that relates to the question.
You can brute force a user password (or sniff if
Les Mikesell wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Errr, why is it easier to get an admin user's name and password than the
root password?
Because typically you only allow root login via console or an existing
login.
I don't see how that relates to the question.
It relates because your
Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
I don't know the state of Nexenta but I can live with Indiana. As a
desktop, it was nice to get Nvidia drivers bundled, a working
thunderbird + lightning plugin enabled, working sound (can I repeat
that?), pidgin, openoffice (needless to say),
On Mar 30, 2009, at 11:58 AM, Les Mikesell lesmikes...@gmail.com
wrote:
Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
I don't know the state of Nexenta but I can live with Indiana. As a
desktop, it was nice to get Nvidia drivers bundled, a working
thunderbird + lightning plugin enabled, working sound
Am 31.03.2009 um 01:12 schrieb Ross Walker:
I would love something like Nexenta, but with a CentOS userland.
What exactly are you missing from Solaris userland that does exist in
Linux, BTW?
Maybe except for all the horrible cat some_arcane_value /proc/foo
or /sys/baz to coax the
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 01:42:48AM +0200, Rainer Duffner wrote:
Am 31.03.2009 um 01:12 schrieb Ross Walker:
I would love something like Nexenta, but with a CentOS userland.
What exactly are you missing from Solaris userland that does exist in
Linux, BTW?
Maybe except for all
I really like a lot of things about Solaris. I dislike a lot of things
about it too.. namely, automated installs are annoying (even with
JumpStart), and rpm+yum is far superior from a user standpoint than
Sun's package - patchid + 8000 different patch management tools. pca
is the closest
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 08:13:51AM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
I really like a lot of things about Solaris. I dislike a lot of things
about it too.. namely, automated installs are annoying (even with
JumpStart), and rpm+yum is far superior from a user standpoint than
Sun's package -
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 05:21:43PM -0700, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 08:13:51AM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
I really like a lot of things about Solaris. I dislike a lot of things
about it too.. namely, automated installs are annoying (even with
JumpStart), and
the new IPS package manager is okay. Doing image-updates has reasonably
worked well too.
Haven't tried this at all... if it's free[1] I will. If it's a large
extra cost, I'll stick with PCA :-)
Also, do to the nature of many of the Solaris patches (which require
reboots), the
Rainer Duffner wrote:
I would love something like Nexenta, but with a CentOS userland.
What exactly are you missing from Solaris userland that does exist in
Linux, BTW?
A package manager that can grab many thousands of packages with their
dependencies and keep them up to date. And a
mbneto wrote:
Hi,
Since the release of CentOS 5.3 is imminent(?) I'd like to ask a
question regarding why did it took so long to be released and, more
important, suggest some actions in order to reduce this time if I can
assume what caused this delay.
Late?
I just finished cleaning up
Michael A. Peters wrote:
First I'd like to make sure I am not complaining about this delay
between the RHEL and CentOS releases per se. I did not help in any way
to make it happen faster and usually I don't mind having a three weeks
gap between them. But I've noticed that we had two
Les Mikesell wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Wow, I really must be out of the loop. New versions of RHEL every 4-6
months?
Damn. I left Fedora because their release schedule was too frequent ...
The Fedora releases change behavior wildly with each release. The point
of enterprise
Robert Nichols wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Wow, I really must be out of the loop. New versions of RHEL every 4-6
months?
Damn. I left Fedora because their release schedule was too frequent ...
The Fedora releases change behavior wildly with each release. The point
Les:
Honest question, not intended to be smart assed in any
way:
Why have you not moved to SL since they have released the
update before CentOS?
Neil
--
Neil Aggarwal, (832)245-7314, www.JAMMConsulting.com
Eliminate junk email and reclaim your inbox.
Visit http://www.spammilter.com for
Neil Aggarwal wrote:
Les:
Honest question, not intended to be smart assed in any
way:
Why have you not moved to SL since they have released the
update before CentOS?
If I liked changing things on a whim, I wouldn't be using enterprise
type distributions in the first place. And since
Ray Van Dolson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 10:25:16PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Neil Aggarwal wrote:
Les:
Honest question, not intended to be smart assed in any
way:
Why have you not moved to SL since they have released the
update before CentOS?
If I liked changing things on a whim,
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 10:56:56PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Ray Van Dolson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 10:25:16PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Neil Aggarwal wrote:
Les:
Honest question, not intended to be smart assed in any
way:
Why have you not moved to SL since they have
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 22:56 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything
RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term
support? I thought perhaps when I mentioned it earlier there would be
a flurry of responses pointing
Ray Van Dolson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 12:46:35PM -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
The Firefox 1.5 to 3.0 move in RHEL was at least understandable, there
was good reason for that, but some of the EPEL changes - I think they
leave it to the discretion of the packager but it's annoying.
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 09:56:07PM -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
Ray Van Dolson wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 12:46:35PM -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
The Firefox 1.5 to 3.0 move in RHEL was at least understandable, there
was good reason for that, but some of the EPEL changes - I
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 21:24 -0700, Craig White wrote:
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 22:56 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything
RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term
support? I thought perhaps when I
So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything
RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term
support? I thought perhaps when I mentioned it earlier there would be
a flurry of responses pointing out functional deficiencies but so far
there have
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 01:17:03PM +0800, Christopher Chan wrote:
So what would be the down side to just walking away from everything
RH-related now that Ubuntu has a free alternative with long term
support? I thought perhaps when I mentioned it earlier there would be
a flurry of
Functional deficiencies here we come:
1) No equivalent to kickstart:
By that I mean, zero support for automated lvm on raid kind of disk
partitioning in the debian-installer
This is a huge issue with SLES. AutoYaST makes me very angry. :-) I
can generalize my kickstart files
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Christopher Chan wrote:
start/stop' though from Intrepid onwards I believe. There is no root
account by default.
There is a root account, you just can't access it w/o setting it's password.
Oh you can. sudo -i. Now go away.
And as soon as you do set
Centos (who cares about RHEL) needs a bit more extra work to make it
more useful for desktops. I had to build me own kiosktool rpm for example.
Ahh, yes. RH has pretty much said they're not interested in the
desktop market. Until that changes either Fedora or Ubuntu it is. I'd
pick Ubuntu
Ray Van Dolson wrote:
Centos (who cares about RHEL) needs a bit more extra work to make it
more useful for desktops. I had to build me own kiosktool rpm for example.
Ahh, yes. RH has pretty much said they're not interested in the
desktop market. Until that changes either Fedora or
2009/3/27 Spiro Harvey sp...@knossos.net.nz:
required? How do you figure anything is *required* of volunteers?
Show me your support contract.
If you're worried that CentOS is late or is stopping you from
fulfilling your own contractual obligations, perhaps you should stop
being a tight-arse
Hello:
Well said!
I tremendously appreciate the effort the development
team puts in and am not complaining one bit about how long
things take. They take what they take and that is fine by
me. Please do not let the negative comments of a few
people reflect badly on the majority of people that
Rob Kampen
Neal Development Group
On Mar 27, 2009, at 18:39, Frank Thommen frank.thom...@embl-heidelberg.de
wrote:
nate wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
[...]
I think it's safe to assume that the majority of CentOS users out
there run CentOS on servers, not on desktops/laptops/etc.
So
On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 08:01 -0500, Neil Aggarwal wrote:
Hello:
Well said!
I tremendously appreciate the effort the development
team puts in and am not complaining one bit about how long
things take. They take what they take and that is fine by
me. Please do not let the negative
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 3:13 AM, William L. Maltby
centos4b...@triad.rr.com wrote:
As a step to reducing the pressure and dissatisfaction of Are We
There Yet? (When will xxx be released?), a simple publication of a
projected time line will help. It should be updated as needed. It should
On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 06:30 +0800, Noob Centos Admin wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 3:13 AM, William L. Maltby
centos4b...@triad.rr.com wrote:
As a step to reducing the pressure and dissatisfaction of Are We
There Yet? (When will xxx be released?), a simple publication of a
projected time
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf
Of Ray Van Dolson
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 11:50 PM
To: centos@centos.org
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Getting ready for CentOS 5.4
Is there still no room for positive feedack and discussion
Rainer Duffner wrote:
Spiro Harvey schrieb:
I've got a couple of cents change here...
While I do think some of the wording of the post that the above post was
replying to was a bit mis-chosen, I like to believe it had a positive spin.
(In that it didn't want to put blame on anybody)
Les Mikesell wrote:
Is there still any reason other than having to learn to type 'apt-get'
instead of 'yum' to prefer Centos over Ubuntu? I think for me it is
just that I started with RH before they imposed the redistribution
restriction nonsense and have been too lazy to change
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 12:34:04PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
Rainer Duffner wrote:
Spiro Harvey schrieb:
I've got a couple of cents change here...
While I do think some of the wording of the post that the above post was
replying to was a bit mis-chosen, I like to believe it had a
Timothy Murphy wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
While I love CentOS, think the team does the best possible job, and
appreciate the work they put into undoing the restrictions on
redistribution by the upstream distro, I have to wonder if it isn't time
to just switch to a base distribution that
Les Mikesell wrote:
While I love CentOS, think the team does the best possible job, and
appreciate the work they put into undoing the restrictions on
redistribution by the upstream distro, I have to wonder if it isn't time
to just switch to a base distribution that doesn't impose those
Les Mikesell wrote:
The ones that require the work that the CentOS team does to
rebuild/rebrand/repackage before redistribution is permitted. This was
As a corporation Red Hat HAD to do that, even if IANAL. CentOS as a
model works just fine. Sure, sometimes there can be a lack of manpower
nate wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
[...]
I think it's safe to assume that the majority of CentOS users out
there run CentOS on servers, not on desktops/laptops/etc.
So I'm one from the minority then :-). CentOS 5 is running on (almost)
all servers and (really) all Linux clients here.
Frank Thommen wrote:
nate wrote:
Les Mikesell wrote:
[...]
I think it's safe to assume that the majority of CentOS users out
there run CentOS on servers, not on desktops/laptops/etc.
So I'm one from the minority then :-). CentOS 5 is running on (almost)
all servers and (really) all
Hi,
As the OP (original poster?) I've read all messages so far and instead of
replying to each one I'd like to sum all up and perhaps clarify my post so
we can move on with some more productive debate.
A background info: I've been using CentOS for almost three years and I am
happy with it.
I've got a couple of cents change here...
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 17:41:41 -0400
mbneto mbn...@gmail.com wrote:
I do not have any sort of numbers of the popularity of CentOS but I
suspect that we are very popular and in that sense a certain level of
responsibility (to that community) is
Spiro Harvey schrieb:
I've got a couple of cents change here...
While I do think some of the wording of the post that the above post was
replying to was a bit mis-chosen, I like to believe it had a positive spin.
(In that it didn't want to put blame on anybody)
I *do* agree with the
Ross Walker wrote:
How about forming a formal non-profit organization around CentOS with
contributors.
The question is where. What counts as a non-profit in the US doesn't
automatically count as one in Europe, for example - that's why there is
a Fedora EMEA, too. Which really binds ressources
On Mar 25, 2009, at 10:18 AM, Lanny Marcus lmmailingli...@gmail.com
wrote:
2009/3/25 Ralph Angenendt ra+cen...@br-online.de:
Ross Walker wrote:
How about forming a formal non-profit organization around CentOS
with
contributors.
The question is where. What counts as a non-profit in the
Ross Walker wrote:
snip
To this end it would cetainly not be rude to ask these companies for
appropriately sized donations to make sure CentOS keeps going strong,
completely voluntary of course, anonymously if preferred, otherwise
they can be prominantly listed as a valued
On Mar 25, 2009, at 8:13 PM, griz_quattro griz_quat...@tx.rr.com
wrote:
Ross Walker wrote:
snip
To this end it would cetainly not be rude to ask these companies for
appropriately sized donations to make sure CentOS keeps going strong,
completely voluntary of course, anonymously if
but what I worry about is members of the core
CentOS team burning out and quitting... that would be much worse for
CentOS than a few weeks delay here and there. For me it is important for
the core team to know that they can take the time off they need for real
life events without feeling
ward.p.fonte...@wellsfargo.com wrote:
My thoughts exactly
-Original Message-
From: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf
Of Noob Centos Admin
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 10:00 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] Getting ready
Morten Torstensen wrote:
Can gcc/make be distributed? Could people dedicate their CPU time ala
SETI or fold...@home to test builds and compiles? I am not sure where
the bottleneck is, and I know throwing money and manpower does not
always help when it comes to software development :)
There
Lanny Marcus wrote:
The $ the project receives goes for hardware and network connectivity.
That is not true.
Money donated to the project goes to sit in a pot. Resources that we use
to do things on and with are on machines that we ( developers, centos
team and contributors ) pay for, manage
Karanbir Singh wrote:
Money donated to the project goes to sit in a pot. Resources that we use
to do things on and with are on machines that we ( developers, centos
team and contributors ) pay for, manage and run ourselves. CentOS does
not subsidise or pay for any of it.
Just to clarify -
On Tue, March 24, 2009 1:13 pm, Karanbir Singh wrote:
Karanbir Singh wrote:
Money donated to the project goes to sit in a pot. Resources that we use
to do things on and with are on machines that we ( developers, centos
team and contributors ) pay for, manage and run ourselves. CentOS does
not
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:18:58AM -0700, Scott Silva wrote:
And then maybe you can take a breath?
You all are very appreciated. Don't let 10 or 20 (l)users make you
think that the other million or so aren't happy!! ;-)
I certainly hope this isn't in response to those of us who have piped
Scott Silva wrote:
Also, were not getting ready for 5.4. were going to be getting ready for
4.8 first, then a CentOS6 Beta and then a 5.4.
And then maybe you can take a breath?
Thats a good point. One thing that I hope to work towards and I feel we
are getting setup to do is get a constant
Scott Silva wrote:
on 3-24-2009 9:53 AM Karanbir Singh spake the following:
Also, were not getting ready for 5.4. were going to be getting ready for
4.8 first, then a CentOS6 Beta and then a 5.4.
And then maybe you can take a breath?
Yeah, no kidding. This is a lot of work, no matter how
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org wrote:
Lanny Marcus wrote:
The $ the project receives goes for hardware and network connectivity.
That is not true.
Money donated to the project goes to sit in a pot. Resources that we use
to do things on and with are on
On Mar 24, 2009, at 1:02 PM, Karanbir Singh mail-li...@karan.org
wrote:
Lanny Marcus wrote:
The $ the project receives goes for hardware and network
connectivity.
That is not true.
Money donated to the project goes to sit in a pot. Resources that we
use
to do things on and with are
Hi,
Since the release of CentOS 5.3 is imminent(?) I'd like to ask a question
regarding why did it took so long to be released and, more important,
suggest some actions in order to reduce this time if I can assume what
caused this delay.
First I'd like to make sure I am not complaining about
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
mbneto wrote:
So, if this is really the case I'd suggest making some sort of campaign
to raise money and provide the necessary resources in order to speed
things up. If RH maintains the 4-6 month schedule it can happen again
in less than three
mbneto wrote:
Hi,
Since the release of CentOS 5.3 is imminent(?) I'd like to ask a
question regarding why did it took so long to be released and, more
important, suggest some actions in order to reduce this time if I can
assume what caused this delay.
First I'd like to make sure I am
Barry L. Kline wrote:
So, if this is really the case I'd suggest making some sort of campaign
to raise money and provide the necessary resources in order to speed
things up. If RH maintains the 4-6 month schedule it can happen again
in less than three months.
There is already a donate link
Hi Barry,
I know but if this campaign comes from CentOS itself it will no appear as a
hoax or some sort of scam.
There is already a donate link on the centos.org web page. You could
easily start that campaign and herd people to the site to make donations.
Barry
-BEGIN PGP
Hi,
There were some unusual situations with core developers this time around.
This is something that we should address don't you think?
Some additional resources could help but since CentOS developers are
unpaid, raising money for human resources may not be the correct
approach. Beefing
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:46:49AM -0400, mbneto wrote:
So, if this is really the case I'd suggest making some sort of campaign to
raise money and provide the necessary resources in order to speed things
up.� If RH maintains the 4-6 month schedule it can happen again in less
than
mbneto wrote:
Hi,
There were some unusual situations with core developers this time
around.
This is something that we should address don't you think?
Well, Karanbir has already weighed in on the thread. If he needs help
I'm sure he knows where to ask.
Some additional
2009/3/23 mbneto mbn...@gmail.com:
There were some unusual situations with core developers this time around.
This is something that we should address don't you think?
If someone has a medical problem and someone else is getting married,
how will you address that? Everyone has a personal life
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 03:10:46PM +0200, Neil Thompson wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:46:49AM -0400, mbneto wrote:
So, if this is really the case I'd suggest making some sort of campaign
to
raise money and provide the necessary resources in order to speed things
up.� If
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Ray Van Dolson ra...@bludgeon.org wrote:
There maybe needs to be a community leizon of some sort to help
leverage these types of offers for help. Many of us are willing to
help, but certainly don't have the necessary time cycles to do so as
effectively as
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo
