Beef:  Slang.       a complaint.
    an argument or dispute.

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.dictionary.com_browse_beef&d=DwIDaQ&c=gRgGjJ3BkIsb5y6s49QqsA&r=gd8BzeSQcySVxr0gDWSEbN-P-pgDXkdyCtaMqdCgPPdW1cyL5RIpaIYrCn8C5x2A&m=udqqjMTgzCb4e7B4bSZsQSucKrJdBsUWfh-ZCVVf41k&s=Mx2aCWnuP6ZizsericAqpby4d9Jgaj5RSZycrHVivqo&e=
as I could not find a definition of "beef" in Merriam-Webster on-line.

The only reason that I am posting a "definition" of the term you used is so that I can address your accusation.

I do not have a complaint, argument, or dispute with Rocky EL or any other distro, enthusiast, "enterprise", or supported for fee. The issues are suitability, currency, hardening, and support mechanisms. I can elaborate on any of these if there is interest. It is difficult, but not impossible, to have a distro that does not have computer science and engineering professionals (not in the sense of necessarily using this as in the sense of a significant source of gainful employment, nor in the sense of formal academic diplomata -- Heaviside had no such diplomata, but in the sense of knowledge, understanding, and skills, of which Heaviside had sufficient in all three of these areas) doing the implementation that is suitable for "hardened" production use, including converting a distribution source into a functioning alternately badged but otherwise identical "executable" distribution.

My observation about the paywall was simply that public archived discussions are needed to trace back both proper attribution (even if not for-fee property) as well as to verify the current state of any particular implementation. (I am not going debate how one terms a practice -- if access requires a fee or the equivalent -- make a contribution of any sort-- such fee-controlled access has the same effect as a paywall -- do not supply the fee, no access.)

A discussion of the actual or to-be-implemented suitability, currency, hardening, and support mechanisms of any distro (or other engineering artifact for that matter) is not a complaint, but simply proper engineering. Actual binary executables are constructed through engineering and technology.

On 12/30/20 8:08 AM, Jon Pruente wrote:
On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 6:51 PM Yasha Karant <ykar...@gmail.com <mailto:ykar...@gmail.com>> wrote:


    Thus, unlike either the Ubuntu (including LTS) Ask Ubuntu or this SL
    list that are available without any fee with full archive access, it
    appears that to get to the RockyEL "list" much older than one calendar
    week, one must subscribe for a fee.  Such a system makes archival
    information not generally available.  If other RockyEL (e.g., #rocky )
    readers do not see the paywall message and are not paying a fee (or
    have
    an institutional "subscription"), please comment as to how to get the
    "archives".


It's not a paywall for users. It's a limit of using a free Slack instance vs paid. The Rocky Linux team is already in the process of moving to a longer term system. The slack was never meant to be permanent, as it was initially used for gmk's HPC company. It was the easiest and most expedient place to send people at the sudden change from Red Hat. You seem to have quite a beef against Rocky in principle, and choose to ignore that the project is literally brand new and was started without any advance plans.

Reply via email to