On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 2:54 PM, PJ Welsh pjwe...@gmail.com wrote:
The list is not deciding these matters. There is no vote. There is
only situational reluctance to allow content by certain people. I
think maybe that (potential) page hits could be a better metric than
the seemingly random way
On Fri, 2009-09-18 at 11:13 +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Christopher Chan
christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote:
Would this do as a rule?
If it is something 'supported' as in one will answer questions on it if
it was asked on irc or the mailing list,
Unless I misinterpreted, you're basically saying that to a writer they
need to go work at the project they are documenting, not CentOS
no, I agree that you have me right that I think content needs
to first go at the proper trailhead in all cases
Would this do as a rule?
If it is
Hi again,
It is perfectly reasonable that I argue to strive to make
fewer forks and less content in the CentOS wiki under that
rubric, as success means the future's primary source doco is
better for _all_ FOSS approaches
I think it's not that easy to handle. Let's take a look at another
Hi again.
Would this do as a rule?
If it is something 'supported' as in one will answer questions on it if
it was asked on irc or the mailing list, then it can go on the wiki
(sendmail, apache, postfix, samba, whatever comes with the Centos
distro). If it won't be 'supported' then minimal
Marcus Moeller wrote:
Hi again.
Would this do as a rule?
If it is something 'supported' as in one will answer questions on it if
it was asked on irc or the mailing list, then it can go on the wiki
(sendmail, apache, postfix, samba, whatever comes with the Centos
distro). If it won't be
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Christopher Chan
christopher.c...@bradbury.edu.hk wrote:
Would this do as a rule?
If it is something 'supported' as in one will answer questions on it if
it was asked on irc or the mailing list, then it can go on the wiki
(sendmail, apache, postfix, samba,
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Christopher Chan
But before we go on, may I ask what is the purpose of the Centos Wiki?
That is a good question. IM not so HO it should contain documentation
which gets people going with things on CentOS. Which is a very broad
view.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 5:44 AM, Ned Slider n...@unixmail.co.uk wrote:
...
Broad views are good IMHO as I think it's easier to address on a case by
case basis largely as this list does at present by asking to see and
discussing proposed documentation.
...
The list is not deciding these
Hi List
my question to everyone is. What is exactly wrong with having helpful
documentation on the centos wiki? Does it really matter if the original
maintainer documents his app. I for one love the fact i can search threw
the wiki and get app#1 working and I also know the procedure has gone
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 20:45 +0200 schrieb Scott Robbins:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 01:27:42PM -0400, Max Hetrick wrote:
Christoph Maser wrote:
Btw. i really consider the current nagios article on the wiki bad. Its
totally outdated and covers way to much info how to configure nagios
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 20:36 +0200 schrieb Scott Robbins:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 06:50:41PM +0200, Christoph Maser wrote:
Done. I hope you incorporate The things Christoph Maser has mentioned
and don't just add the one line from your first mail (which will
break, when the box is
Hi all,
I know that the nagios docs suck, and actually everything around nagios.
But what does that have to do with centos? And why don't you contribute
to the nagios docs?
The nagios-wiki (http://wkiki.nagios.org) is totally orphaned also!
I personally agree on that. We have similar issues
Christoph Maser wrote:
So we should make a proper nagios documentation on the centos-wiki
because the official nagios docs suck?
No, but I don't see that it's a problem that it's on the CentOS wiki.
There are lots of guides on the wiki that aren't exactly CentOS
specific, so does that mean
The true URL: http://wiki.nagios.org
Regards: FRamonTB
--- El jue, 17/9/09, Christoph Maser c...@financial.com escribió:
De: Christoph Maser c...@financial.com
Asunto: Re: [CentOS-docs] Contribution to wiki: nagios incompatibility with
centos 5.2
Para: Mail list for wiki articles centos-docs
On 09/16/2009 07:13 PM, Max Hetrick wrote:
In my experience with working with Nagios, the problem that always came
up was that people didn't know where to even start because there were
too many options, and they were overwhelmed.
I totally agree. Having enough content in one place so that
On 09/17/2009 07:07 AM, Christoph Maser wrote:
So we should make a proper nagios documentation on the centos-wiki
because the official nagios docs suck?
Read my last email in reply to Max. Things are not really that black and
white. Nagios docs suck. Their developers have made it a point to go
On 09/17/2009 07:31 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
I personally agree on that. We have similar issues with the Spacewalk
documentation (another thread :?). It would be great to have something
like an installation guide covering the CentOS specific aspects and
links to the upstream docs.
Thats
Dear Karan.
For Spacewalk e.g., I have started to improve the 'official' upstream
docs a bit (which are already quite good), instead of re-generating
content.
Btw, there is also an effort underway to have a centos specific
spacewalk repo hosted on centos.org to make life even easier. At
Marcus Moeller wrote:
So I am a bit disappointed (but can understand) ppl. like Max who
already contributed high quality docs in the past are re-signing from
contributing to the wiki (just because one or two other guys have a
different pov). I have also suggested that docs like the CentOS
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote:
different pov). I have also suggested that docs like the CentOS
specific owlriver rpm howtos (http://www.owlriver.com/tips/non-root/)
could as well resist on the CentOS wiki. But it's not my decision.
I assume 'reside' for 'resist' ... Scope is one
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Max Hetrick wrote:
You have one team member stating they believe writers should
go upstream for all documentation purposes,
if you are referring to me, your projection into what I wrote
has mislead you.
-- Russ herrold
___
R P Herrold wrote:
if you are referring to me, your projection into what I wrote
has mislead you.
Well, I was kind of referring to what you said here:
If people want to write content, they NEED TO GO TO FEDORA, or
the upstream, and get patches accepted, so the changes flow
back down in
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Max Hetrick wrote:
R P Herrold wrote:
if you are referring to me, your projection into what I wrote
has mislead you.
Well, I was kind of referring to what you said here:
If people want to write content, they NEED TO GO TO FEDORA, or
the upstream, and get patches
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Martin Boel, Silverbullet
b...@silverbullet.dk wrote:
Hi
username: MartinBoel
Please grant me access.
Done. I hope you incorporate The things Christoph Maser has mentioned
and don't just add the one line from your first mail (which will
break, when the box is
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 15:19 +0200 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Martin Boel, Silverbullet
b...@silverbullet.dk wrote:
Hi
username: MartinBoel
Please grant me access.
Done. I hope you incorporate The things Christoph Maser has mentioned
and don't
Christoph Maser wrote:
Btw. i really consider the current nagios article on the wiki bad. Its
totally outdated and covers way to much info how to configure nagios
itself. In my opinion this should be simply replaced by links to the
official documentation since it is out of place and
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Christoph Maser c...@financial.com wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 15:19 +0200 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Martin Boel, Silverbullet
b...@silverbullet.dk wrote:
Hi
username: MartinBoel
Please grant me access.
Mathew S. McCarrell wrote:
It might be simpler to just have a tutorial that uses the package that
is available from rpmforge. I have already written such a tutorial and
it receives several hundred hits each month. Its also the second result
in Google if you search for install nagios
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 19:34 +0200 schrieb Mathew S. McCarrell:
It might be simpler to just have a tutorial that uses the package that
is available from rpmforge. I have already written such a tutorial
and it receives several hundred hits each month. Its also the second
result in
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Christoph Maser c...@financial.com wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 19:34 +0200 schrieb Mathew S. McCarrell:
It might be simpler to just have a tutorial that uses the package that
is available from rpmforge. I have already written such a tutorial
On 09/16/2009 06:44 PM, Max Hetrick wrote:
I've not read your guide, but perhaps both could be united to make one
that's current and suitable for everyone's needs. Just a thought too. :)
How about splitting it up into 'Install Guide' and a 'Recommended first
steps'.
Having used Nagios ( or
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 20:05 +0200 schrieb Karanbir Singh:
On 09/16/2009 06:44 PM, Max Hetrick wrote:
I've not read your guide, but perhaps both could be united to make one
that's current and suitable for everyone's needs. Just a thought too. :)
How about splitting it up into 'Install
Karanbir Singh wrote:
How about splitting it up into 'Install Guide' and a 'Recommended first
steps'.
Having used Nagios ( or does Nagios use us ? ) I know there are a
million different ways to set things up. And only a few people really
need to get down and understand eveyrthing about
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 06:50:41PM +0200, Christoph Maser wrote:
Done. I hope you incorporate The things Christoph Maser has mentioned
and don't just add the one line from your first mail (which will
break, when the box is relabeled).
Ralph
Btw. i really consider the current nagios
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 01:27:42PM -0400, Max Hetrick wrote:
Christoph Maser wrote:
Btw. i really consider the current nagios article on the wiki bad. Its
totally outdated and covers way to much info how to configure nagios
itself. In my opinion this should be simply replaced by links to
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 07:58:20PM +0200, Christoph Maser wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 19:34 +0200 schrieb Mathew S. McCarrell:
This one?
http://docs.cslabs.clarkson.edu/wiki/Install_Nagios_on_CentOS_5
This is what i really think it should like!
You're serious? That's
Scott Robbins wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 07:58:20PM +0200, Christoph Maser wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 19:34 +0200 schrieb Mathew S. McCarrell:
This one?
http://docs.cslabs.clarkson.edu/wiki/Install_Nagios_on_CentOS_5
This is what i really think it should
Am Dienstag, den 15.09.2009, 09:21 +0200 schrieb Martin Boel,
Silverbullet:
Hi
Thanks for you reply. I guess this should be fixed i the next nagios package
or next centos version, but for now the public should
be told about a workaround, that works with the current versions. There is
quite
On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 09:21 +0200, Martin Boel, Silverbullet wrote:
Hi
Thanks for you reply. I guess this should be fixed i the next nagios package
or next centos version, but for now the public should
be told about a workaround, that works with the current versions. There is
quite a
Am Dienstag, den 15.09.2009, 09:21 +0200 schrieb Martin Boel,
Silverbullet:
Hi
Thanks for you reply. I guess this should be fixed i the next nagios package
or next centos version, but for now the public should
be told about a workaround, that works with the current versions. There is
quite
Hi
I would like to contribute to the wiki.centos.org:
username: boel
subject: nagios incompatibility with centos 5.2
location: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Nagios
content: A security feature of centos 5.2 SELinux prevents the access
from the apache httpd server to the needed /var/nagios files.
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 16:11 +0200, Martin Boel, Silverbullet wrote:
Hi
I would like to contribute to the wiki.centos.org:
username: boel
Hmmm. We really do prefer FirstnameLastname.
subject: nagios incompatibility with centos 5.2
location: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Nagios
content: A
Am Montag, den 14.09.2009, 16:15 +0200 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 16:11 +0200, Martin Boel, Silverbullet wrote:
Hi
I would like to contribute to the wiki.centos.org:
username: boel
Hmmm. We really do prefer FirstnameLastname.
subject: nagios incompatibility with
Martin Boel, Silverbullet wrote:
Hi
I would like to contribute to the wiki.centos.org:
username: boel
subject: nagios incompatibility with centos 5.2
location: http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Nagios
content: A security feature of centos 5.2 SELinux prevents the access
from the apache httpd
Am Montag, den 14.09.2009, 16:37 +0200 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 16:24 +0200, Christoph Maser wrote:
Am Montag, den 14.09.2009, 16:15 +0200 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 16:11 +0200, Martin Boel, Silverbullet wrote:
workaround is to execute the
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 16:24 +0200, Christoph Maser wrote:
Am Montag, den 14.09.2009, 16:15 +0200 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 16:11 +0200, Martin Boel, Silverbullet wrote:
workaround is to execute the command: chcon -R httpd_sys_content_t
/var/nagios
Is that still
47 matches
Mail list logo
