> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 13:23:16 -0500 > From: Audioslave - 7M3 - Live <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: no support w/2.5 kernel installed. Spelling, no big deal 4 me > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Jarod Wilson wrote: > I usually abrieviate thev word as misc. It doesn't follow any convention > for spelling that I heard of. Is this word perhaps non-english, where > it would follow that language's rules and regs 4 spelling.
English (especially US English) is quite the mutt language. > > Miscellaneous. Sorry, spelling is one of my pet peeves. :) I just prefer > > to see people spell things correctly, because in my mind, mis-spellings > > detract from the respect people have for what you say (er, write). > > > > I try to spell things correctly. What spelling does for me is very > little. I take it that those that do not finite their spelling to a > conformity standard are more genuine and are less likely to be clones > from a tribe. Ya got me. I'm a clone. > A completely conformity spelled document usually conveys deceptiveness > and conformity for a person. Deception, because most likely, they need > the aid of a spell checker. Conformity, because it sounds like a "Felix > Ungar" for the language community. I still think a document in which everything is properly spelled conveys that the author has a very good grasp on the language, not deception. And 99.999% of the time, I don't need a spell-checker (those miss grammatical errors, and like-sounding word substitutions, so you can't rely on them anyway). :) Some of it isn't even a matter of spelling. Some people just aren't that handy with the keyboard. To this day, I still believe keyboarding was the best class I ever took in high school. > > Exactly. But note that Red Hat won't provide any support whatsoever for > > a machine with something other than an officially released Red Hat > > kernel, for obvious reasons. > > > > I understand the conformity rational regarding support. If it ain't in > the supported "dictionary" for rules and regulations. It isn't in whole > a "spellchecked" problem. > > I think that it is a policy that both adds core to the product and also > severely inhibits more rapid advancements for the distribution. A large part of it is a business decision. Maintaining a tech support staff isn't cheap, and the job becomes much harder if you don't limit support to stable products. > I feel that if you expect to make a profit from Linux. You will have to > abandon the concept of all the ducks in a row. For paying customers, > they are both real and hardly regard limitations on paid for options as > an acceptable situation. I disagree. The biggest profits are in the corporate arena. Corporate customers want stable products (and yet some still use Windows, so maybe unstable kernels would be okay?!?). > >>For my situation, with computer systems, that are used at work. There is no usage > >>of linux, for the most part. I think that odd numbered releases should be odd > >>numbered and follow the developmental phases of the kernel. Of course, this idea > >>goes to the "added effort" and little added benefits that adding the bp-sec or > >>bp-broken-opt wiuld convey to an average person, that would be aided with the > >>visual que. Though, I agree with the ending argument that you cannot save the > >>world. Though, it is pretty entertaining to do so. > > > > > > I whole-heartedly disagree with your idea that odd-numbered OS releases > > ought to be development versions. That is what betas are for. Do you > > know of any other company putting out an operating system in that > > manner? > > > > Betas are made to take the alpha factor out of the equation. Running > official developmental releases is a concept that I favor. This beta > cycle went through three phases. Get to phase 1, then you are stagnant > until phase 2. Run phase 2 for awhile, then you are stagnated at phase 3. Um, I think the main difference between a beta release and a development release is, for the most part, the name. And you aren't stagnant. There's Rawhide and up2date. > This is my first beta release that I also interacted within a mailing > group. I have learned a lot from the time that I have spent on the list > and beta. > > I appreciate the wide range of intellects that are also participating on > the beta. I learned more about Red Hat, than solo on my 4.2 to present > cowboying probably achieved. Cowboying is good, too. But you definitely can pick up a lot just by participating in these lists. -- Jarod Wilson, RHCE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "A wise man once said nothing at all" -- -- Phoebe-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list
