Akemi Yagi wrote:
I can go on with my response to your personal view, but doing so would
be way off-topic here in this thread. Therefore, I started an open
discussion session in the right place for this topic - not
surprisingly - in the CentOS forum:
How can a forum possibly be the right plac
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 5:19 AM, Spike Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Akemi Yagi wrote:
>
>> Spike Turner wrote:
>>
>> > Who would like the mailing list to be as fragmented
>> > as the CentOS forum? Fragmentation means erosion of
>> > the userbase and is not good for the community.
>> >
>> >
Spike Turner wrote on Fri, 17 Oct 2008 05:19:36 -0700 (PDT):
> - some may not view the centos forum as fragmented
> but is the participation at the same level as the
> unfragmented mailing list?
Couldn't it be that some people simply prefer email over HTML forums?
Especially those that have less
Spike Turner wrote on Fri, 17 Oct 2008 02:28:17 -0700 (PDT):
> Popular huh?
You didn't get the subtile irony?
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@
Akemi Yagi wrote:
> Spike Turner wrote:
>
> > Who would like the mailing list to be as fragmented
> > as the CentOS forum? Fragmentation means erosion of
> > the userbase and is not good for the community.
> >
> > Spike.
>
> Once again you are referring to the CentOS forum. Are you
> saying th
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:28 AM, Spike Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Who would like the mailing list to be as fragmented
> as the CentOS forum? Fragmentation means erosion of
> the userbase and is not good for the community.
>
> Spike.
Once again you are referring to the CentOS forum. Are
Spike Turner wrote:
> Ralph Angenendt wrote:
>
> > > Out of curiosity which major linux distro operates
> > > a fragmented mailing list such as the one proposed?
> >
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo
> > http://lists.debian.org/completeindex.html
> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/
> > https:
Niki Kovacs wrote:
> Given the popularity of this thread, I suggest creating a
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, where folks can discuss
> list-related stuff.
>
Popular huh? Let as see some stats on the
posts by user
* Karanbir Singh (15)
* Spike Turner (10)
* Spiro Harvey (8)
* Kenneth Price (5)
* Fra
Toby Bluhm a écrit :
I put myself into the keep as is category.
Given the popularity of this thread, I suggest creating a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] list, where folks can discuss list-related stuff.
"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one frequently goes ranting on and on
at ball-breaking length.
Craig White <> scribbled on Thursday, October 16, 2008 4:24 PM:
> If you are going to go to multiple lists, might I suggest that you have
> 1 system-admins list and 1 general-users list and you can tightly
> control the system-admins list.
I think you're on to something here. I assume you mean th
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, John R Pierce wrote:
I'd have to suggest that the 'default' list (eg this one) should be the most
general and beginner oriented, and any new additional lists should be the
ones with the narrower focus (centos-tech, for instance, or centos-sysadmin).
in my experience with
John R Pierce wrote:
I'd have to suggest that the 'default' list (eg this one) should be the
most general and beginner oriented, and any new additional lists should
be the ones with the narrower focus (centos-tech, for instance, or
centos-sysadmin).
Narrower focus? Why? Why should there not b
I'd have to suggest that the 'default' list (eg this one) should be the
most general and beginner oriented, and any new additional lists should
be the ones with the narrower focus (centos-tech, for instance, or
centos-sysadmin).
in my experience with running multiple lists, unless there's a
Karanbir Singh wrote:
Christopher Chan wrote:
- technologies
- best practices
- deployment strategies and tools
- management strategies and tools
I don't know whether that will take off...has not it been tried
outside centos.org by centos list members already?
Not that I am aware of. But it
To be honest, I don't think this list should be split. Instead it
should be more rigorously policed. This should be a list about CentOS,
and working with CentOS.
Hi
Rigorous policing in this context is counter productive. Specifically in
three areas
1. The person or group enforcing t
> Really? What about SLED (Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop) or
> Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop?
Marketing terms for IT managers and non-technical decision makers.
--
Spiro Harvey Knossos Networks Ltd
021-295-1923www.knossos.net.nz
signature.asc
Descrip
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> > Out of curiosity which major linux distro operates
> > a fragmented mailing list such as the one proposed?
>
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo
> http://lists.debian.org/completeindex.html
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/
> https://ml.mandriva.net/wws/lists
>
> Compa
Karanbir Singh:
Morten Torstensen wrote:
I think the general CentOS list should be an open and embracing
community. A centos-tech list sounds more like the name of the
"developer" or "power user" list than a semi-off-topic technology
discussion group. That was my first thought when seeing the
Spiro Harvey wrote:
> well, if they're running Gnome, then they're
> probably not using the
> machine in an "enterprise" capacity. nobody in
> their right mind would
> install X on a server.
>
Really? What about SLED (Suse Linux Enterprise Desktop) or
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop? Read somet
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 4:44 PM, John Hinton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Karanbir Singh wrote:
>>
>> MHR wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you - for listening, participating, discussing and making the
>>> right choice.
>>
>> At the moment, its more a case of a 'failure to communicate' in my
>> opinion. Lets se
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008, Spiro Harvey wrote:
>> > Given the overall poor reception of the idea, I'd just put it on
>> > the back burner for now...
>> yes, thats sounding like a good idea for the time being.
>
>I don't think it is a good idea. I think that we need two separate
>lists. One for general u
On Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:48:31 +1300
Spiro Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> well, if they're running Gnome, then they're probably not using the
> machine in an "enterprise" capacity. nobody in their right mind would
> install X on a server.
*blink* I run a couple of Centos 5 application servers
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:44:00 -0400
John Hinton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The bulk of the posts seem to regard something
> that is more desktop related. Please understand this is not a negative
> as this is one fantastic service to those working with CentOS. All good,
The reason for this is
> > Given the overall poor reception of the idea, I'd just put it on
> > the back burner for now...
> yes, thats sounding like a good idea for the time being.
I don't think it is a good idea. I think that we need two separate
lists. One for general users, one for server sysadmins.
What we don't k
> A driveby waste of space post was one by a certain Karanbir
> telling someone to recklessly upgrade Gnome when this is supposed
> to be an enterprise distro.
well, if they're running Gnome, then they're probably not using the
machine in an "enterprise" capacity. nobody in their right mind would
Karanbir Singh wrote:
MHR wrote:
Thank you - for listening, participating, discussing and making the
right choice.
At the moment, its more a case of a 'failure to communicate' in my
opinion. Lets see how it pans out. There are still some really good
ideas in this thread, most worth looking a
> I also note that moderation comes in 2 forms...the first being when
> one of the CentOS developers says stop this thread which is irregular,
and you'll also notice that this never works. the thread typically
degenerates into the yay-sayers and the nay-sayers, which actually
produces *more* noise
> What would you recommend as an alternative name for the list ? And it
> wont be 'offtopic' technology chatter, it will be very much ontopic
> there :D
centos-sysadmin?
--
Spiro Harvey Knossos Networks Ltd
021-295-1923www.knossos.net.nz
signature.asc
De
James B. Byrne wrote:
I too, see little problem with the current signal to noise ratio.
Compared to some tech lists I subscribe too this one is pretty much always
on the topic of some aspect of using CentOS effective and efficiently.
I agree. There are times when stuff that obviously
hey tony...
care to discern the future results of the US pres election!!!
thanks for the laugh...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Toby Bluhm
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 11:32 AM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] new list
I was interested in seeing what the actual vote results may be, so
here's what I've calculated:
New list as proposed - 5
Keep as is - 11
Either way - 2
Keep + update charter - 2
New list + new name/charter - 6
Not declared - 3
A few folks posted remarks, but I could not detect a vote - th
Karanbir Singh wrote:
And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further encourage
such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list.
Over a period of time, we would like to see the CentOS list become a
more user help and distro specific list, with generic conversa
Spike Turner wrote:
> Out of curiosity which major linux distro operates
> a fragmented mailing list such as the one proposed?
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo
http://lists.debian.org/completeindex.html
https://lists.ubuntu.com/
https://ml.mandriva.net/wws/lists
Compared to those CentOS re
Ross Walker wrote:
Given the overall poor reception of the idea, I'd just put it on the back
burner for now...
yes, thats sounding like a good idea for the time being.
- KB
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/lis
On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 18:12 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> Bob Taylor wrote:
> > Have you looked at Usenet? It's user post/OT list history? Should give
> > you good information on splitting a list into one or more parts and the
> > results of doing so.
>
> Last time I checked, there was more than
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Spike Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think I've seen Dag Wieers and Johhny Hughes posting questions
> on the Nahant-list, why not on this list or the Centos forum?
> Such a fragmentation as that proposed is one guaranteed to
> turn the CentOS mailing list al
On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 10:08 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> this list isnt really a general list as you put it, its more of a
> user-help and support list for people who use and are considering to use
> CentOS.
This is my understanding of the purpose of this list.
> This list is now also at a
MHR wrote:
Thank you - for listening, participating, discussing and making the
right choice.
At the moment, its more a case of a 'failure to communicate' in my
opinion. Lets see how it pans out. There are still some really good
ideas in this thread, most worth looking at.
- KB
_
Stephen Harris wrote:
To be honest, I don't think this list should be split. Instead it
should be more rigorously policed.
I have to disagree strongly with that, since policing generally wastes
everyone's time with more noise that it manages to control and there
will (and should) always be
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ross Walker wrote:
>>
>> Given the overall poor reception of the idea, I'd just put it on the back
>> burner for now...
>
> yes, thats sounding like a good idea for the time being.
>
> - KB
Thank you - for listening, par
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marcelo M. Garcia wrote:
>>
>> I understand the eagerness to lower the "noise" ratio,
>
> I've read and re-read my original email, and not one place can I find
> something that would lead so many people to believe that the
Spike Turner wrote:
A driveby waste of space post was one by a certain Karanbir
telling someone to recklessly upgrade Gnome when this is supposed
to be an enterprise distro.
Last time I checked, it was still a free world ? unless you live in the
US, in which case, all bets are off. And yes, I
Karanbir Singh wrote:
> Thats a bit of a dribveby waste of space post that does not
> really merit
> a reply from anyone. Also if that was something that
> concerns you so
> much, what have you done about it ?
>
> >
> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-October/066154.html
>
> Johnny
Marcelo M. Garcia wrote:
I understand the eagerness to lower the "noise" ratio,
I've read and re-read my original email, and not one place can I find
something that would lead so many people to believe that the whole aim
of the new list was to reduce the noise ratio alone.
Maybe I just didn
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> If the CentOS devs don't have time to answer key questions such as
>> on the kernel but have time to consider fragmenting the mailing list
>> who wins/loses?
>
> What barriers did you run into when you tried to help wit
Bob Taylor wrote:
Have you looked at Usenet? It's user post/OT list history? Should give
you good information on splitting a list into one or more parts and the
results of doing so.
Last time I checked, there was more than 1 newsgroup.
- KB
___
CentO
On: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:01:54 +0100, "Marcelo M. Garcia"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Karanbir Singh wrote:
>> One thing that we are often blamed for is trying to stifle conversations
>> and to discourage people from commenting / contributing / encouraging
>> conversations. And that cant be fu
Kenneth Price wrote:
and that includes you, ya big teddy bear.
I am not *that* fat!
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Christopher Chan wrote:
- technologies
- best practices
- deployment strategies and tools
- management strategies and tools
I don't know whether that will take off...has not it been tried outside
centos.org by centos list members already?
Not that I am aware of. But its worth a try here in .
Les Mikesell wrote:
Centos-applications might make sense if the idea is to cover how to do
things using programs that run on Centos - or when/how to replace the
packaged apps with newer versions. But you might want hardware advice too.
yes, also the idea of best practices is something that wo
Spike Turner wrote:
perhaps that is why "core" issues in CentOS like the kernel
and samba are ignored by the developers? Examples :-
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-October/066143.html
Thats a bit of a dribveby waste of space post that does not really merit
a reply from anyone.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:18:42AM -0500, Kenneth Price wrote:
> - "John Hinton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But I would like a bit more freedom on the sysadmin list. The ability
> > to get more in depth on particulars and include discussions of other
> > software which interacts with exis
On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 10:02 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
[snip]
Karanbir,
Have you looked at Usenet? It's user post/OT list history? Should give
you good information on splitting a list into one or more parts and the
results of doing so.
Bob
--
Bob Taylor
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
> I agree with all you said and I think that a distinction
> along the lines
> of how one uses CentOS might indeed help, say
> centos-server-users and
> centos-desktop-users or a list that is just about hardware
> and making it
> work with CentOS.
Out of curiosity which maj
On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 11:18 -0500, Kenneth Price wrote:
> - "John Hinton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Craig White wrote:
> > >
> > > If you are going to go to multiple lists, might I suggest that you
> > > have 1 system-admins list and 1 general-users list and you can tightly
> >
> > But I
John Hinton wrote on Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:09:26 -0400:
> Perhaps a new list name that might be considered would be
> CentOS-Extended or CentOS-Servers. A place where Apache conf can be
> discussed, as I'm sure the desktop users don't want to hear about
> this... or running a DNS server... and th
- "John Hinton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Craig White wrote:
> >
> > If you are going to go to multiple lists, might I suggest that you
> > have 1 system-admins list and 1 general-users list and you can tightly
>
> But I would like a bit more freedom on the sysadmin list. The ability
> to g
- "Craig White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you are going to go to multiple lists, might I suggest that you
> have 1 system-admins list and 1 general-users list and you can tightly
> control the system-admins list.
I disagreed with the idea of creating a second list as originally proposed,
- "Karanbir Singh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kenneth Price wrote:
> > I agree with Jeff. While I understand this general list can become
> a bit overwhelming for the CentOS Staff, we all must remember that
> this is a GENERAL list. All questions, from the novice to the expert
> should be w
Craig White wrote:
If you are going to go to multiple lists, might I suggest that you have
1 system-admins list and 1 general-users list and you can tightly
control the system-admins list.
Craig
Craig. I like these definitive names!
But I would like a bit more freedom on the sysadmin list
Karanbir Singh wrote:
Chris Geldenhuis wrote:
I agree with Jeff, in other forums where that I belong to the
distinction between "tech" and "chat" quickly becomes blurred and
many posts are cross posted to both (or all) lists, causing
duplication in downloads and scanning.
how about when the
On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 10:08 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> Kenneth Price wrote:
> > I agree with Jeff. While I understand this general list can become a bit
> > overwhelming for the CentOS Staff, we all must remember that this is a
> > GENERAL list. All questions, from the novice to the expert
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
I'm all for having less traffic on this list, but I don't have a good
recipe for that. I doubt that splitting the list will really help much. As
others have already said you will probably end up with two lists that have
mixed conversations from the topics of both lists. And
Karanbir Singh wrote:
Morten Torstensen wrote:
I think the general CentOS list should be an open and embracing
community. A centos-tech list sounds more like the name of the
"developer" or "power user" list than a semi-off-topic technology
discussion group. That was my first thought when seein
I'm all for having less traffic on this list, but I don't have a good
recipe for that. I doubt that splitting the list will really help much. As
others have already said you will probably end up with two lists that have
mixed conversations from the topics of both lists. And it won't help with
t
Karanbir Singh wrote:
One thing that we are often blamed for is trying to stifle conversations
and to discourage people from commenting / contributing / encouraging
conversations. And that cant be further from the truth, really. We are
all pro-community ( and when I say we, I mean everyone - in
Spike Turner wrote:
> perhaps that is why "core" issues in CentOS like the kernel
> and samba are ignored by the developers? Examples :-
>
> http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2008-October/066143.html
We are not going to rebase except if upstream does. And maybe nobody
answered that becaus
Karanbir Singh wrote:
> Over a period of time, we would like to see the CentOS list
> become a
> more user help and distro specific list, with generic
> conversations
> moving to the centos-tech list.
>
perhaps that is why "core" issues in CentOS like the kernel
and samba are ignored by the
Karanbir Singh wrote:
Morten Torstensen wrote:
I think the general CentOS list should be an open and embracing
community. A centos-tech list sounds more like the name of the
"developer" or "power user" list than a semi-off-topic technology
discussion group. That was my first thought when seein
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 22:54 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> Karanbir Singh wrote:
> > And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further encourage
> > such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list.
>
> Also, all comments are welcome!
>
> If there is a general feeli
Karanbir Singh wrote:
What would you recommend as an alternative name for the list ? And it
wont be 'offtopic' technology chatter, it will be very much ontopic
there :D
centos-core, centos-base, centos-root, centos-system, centos-admin ...
just dropping in some. "tech" is a pretty wide term.
Chris Geldenhuis wrote:
I agree with Jeff, in other forums where that I belong to the
distinction between "tech" and "chat" quickly becomes blurred and many
posts are cross posted to both (or all) lists, causing duplication in
downloads and scanning.
how about when the distinction is between
Morten Torstensen wrote:
I think the general CentOS list should be an open and embracing
community. A centos-tech list sounds more like the name of the
"developer" or "power user" list than a semi-off-topic technology
discussion group. That was my first thought when seeing the new name.
What
Kenneth Price wrote:
I agree with Jeff. While I understand this general list can become a bit
overwhelming for the CentOS Staff, we all must remember that this is a GENERAL
list. All questions, from the novice to the expert should be welcome. This
list is not only a way to get problems reso
Jeff wrote:
There are probably as many (or more) threads that drift off topic as
there are those that start out that way and are labeled as such. I
don't think a new list is really going to help create the separation
you seek. In fact, introducing a second list will probably generate
many convers
Frank Cox a écrit :
I tend to agree with you, actually. The Fedora list, for example, seems to
work fine as far as I can see (most of the time, anyway), and I just skip over
anything that doesn't look interesting to me.
I second that. Coming from Slackware, I tend to adhere to the KISS (Keep
Kenneth Price wrote:
I favor one-stop shopping.
I agree with Jeff. While I understand this general list can become a bit overwhelming for the CentOS Staff, we all must remember that this is a GENERAL list.
I think the general CentOS list should be an open and embracing
community. A centos
Michael Semcheski <> scribbled on Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:17 AM:
> This may sound crazy, but maybe the thing to do is let the main list
> continue the way it is, but update the guidelines for this list to
> explicitly allow the things that Karanbir mentioned in the OP. Then,
> and this is th
Karanbir Singh <> scribbled on Wednesday, October 15, 2008 11:55 PM:
>> And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further encourage
>> such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list.
>
> Also, all comments are welcome!
Sounds like a plan.
How would a newbie know w
Jeff wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further encourage
such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list.
There are probably as many (or more) threads that drift off
I don't think a new list will work any better than this list. As far as
an OT post I will give an example, if somewhat contrived:
I'm looking for a, possible freeware, app that I know *what it does* but
do not have a clue what various and sundry names it hides behind. I've
tried a number of times
Bruce,
For starters, please start following the basic rules of the list, such
as bottom posting and trimming your replies.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 21:03, bruce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> my question was vague... but the funny thing.. someone from this
> list pointed my in the direction of a com
Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I favor one-stop shopping.
> My $0.02
I favour quality over quantity, and I have $2 to spend. :)
Forums are one-stop shops, and even they have different sub-forums that
categorise conversations.
--
Spiro Harvey Knossos Networks Ltd
021-295-19
y/app that appears to do what
i'm looking for.. so it must not have been too vague...
peace..
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Filipe Brandenburger
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 6:00 PM
To: CentOS mailing list
Subject: Re: [CentOS] new lis
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 20:41, Kenneth Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - "Jeff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I favor one-stop shopping.
>
> I believe creating another list is a mistake. [...]
> a second list will only encourage cross-posting.
I second that.
As I see it, although this
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 5:41 PM, Kenneth Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - "Jeff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I favor one-stop shopping.
>
> I agree with Jeff.
Count me in, there, too. This may sound odd after my last posting,
but I prefer the idea of a single list, I just think we sh
- "Jeff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further
> encourage
> > such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list.
>
> There are probably as many
> > 'centos-tech' list.
> If there is a general feeling that this would help, then we will go
> ahead and setup the new list in the next few days.
I think this would be a good idea.
you have my vote.
--
Spiro Harvey Knossos Networks Ltd
021-295-1923www.knos
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further encourage
> such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list.
There are probably as many (or more) threads that drift off topic as
there are t
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Frank Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suspect that most of the discussion and question ask-and-answer stuff
> currently dealt with here will migrate to the new list within a short period
> of
> time, simply because it will be more free-wheeling and easy to post
Karanbir Singh wrote:
One thing that we are often blamed for is trying to stifle conversations
and to discourage people from commenting / contributing / encouraging
conversations. And that cant be further from the truth, really. We are
all pro-community ( and when I say we, I mean everyone - in
Karanbir Singh wrote:
One thing that we are often blamed for is trying to stifle conversations
and to discourage people from commenting / contributing / encouraging
conversations. And that cant be further from the truth, really. We are
all pro-community ( and when I say we, I mean everyone - in
On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:25:24 -0700
Bill Campbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Personally I prefer the more general lists rather than splitting
> off into a bunch of more specific ones. I often learn things by
> reading messages that I would see on more targeted lists. The
> more general lists al
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008, Frank Cox wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 22:52:44 +0100
>Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further encourage
>> such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list.
>
>Sounds like a whale of a plan.
On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 22:52:44 +0100
Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further encourage
> such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list.
Sounds like a whale of a plan.
--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http:
Karanbir Singh wrote:
However, one thing that does get in the way, often, and something that
we all feel creates a higher 'noise' ratio is conversations on this
list about semi-related stuff, but not something that directly
contributes to the general users of CentOS. Conversations that
speci
Karanbir Singh wrote:
And to better cater to these conversations, as well as further encourage
such content, we'd like to propose creating a 'centos-tech' list.
Also, all comments are welcome!
If there is a general feeling that this would help, then we will go
ahead and setup the new list in
One thing that we are often blamed for is trying to stifle conversations
and to discourage people from commenting / contributing / encouraging
conversations. And that cant be further from the truth, really. We are
all pro-community ( and when I say we, I mean everyone - including the
contributo
98 matches
Mail list logo