On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 2:54 PM, PJ Welsh 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 we have now.
On Fri, 2009-09-18 at 11:13 +0200, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Christopher Chan
> 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 wi
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
threw
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 5:44 AM, Ned Slider 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 matters. There is no
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
>
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote:
> In conclusion of this thread (and all mentioned options) I have tried
> to outline what kind of content should be published on the wiki:
>
> http://wiki.centos.org/Contribute
I'm not quite sure if I share that opinion :)
> Feel free to co
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Christopher Chan
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, whatever comes with the Centos
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).
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 mini
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
e
>> 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?
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 g
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
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 02:56:20PM -0400, R P Herrold wrote:
> 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 misle
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
___
Ce
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 on
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
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
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 i
On 09/17/2009 07:10 AM, Christoph Maser wrote:
> I think it is a proper installation how to install nagios from rpmforge.
> Can you say exactly what is wrong with it? And what ist the MS thingy?
it looks, to me anyway, more like howto use yum and example chkconfig
commands.
--
Karanbir Singh :
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 g
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 so
The true URL: http://wiki.nagios.org
Regards: FRamonTB
--- El jue, 17/9/09, Christoph Maser escribió:
De: Christoph Maser
Asunto: Re: [CentOS-docs] Contribution to wiki: nagios incompatibility with
centos 5.2
Para: "Mail list for wiki articles"
Fecha: jueves, 17 septiembre, 200
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
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 is
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
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 20:47 +0200 schrieb Scott Robbins:
> 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
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 config
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
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? Th
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 li
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 curr
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 a
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 'I
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 d
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Christoph Maser 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
> > and it r
Ha, I clearly looked at the article too quickly.
I'm also open to the idea of combining my guide with the CentOS wiki one.
Feel free to take a look at and use any part of the one that I've written,
which is available at
http://docs.cslabs.clarkson.edu/wiki/Install_Nagios_on_CentOS_5 . Its not
qui
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
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 19:27 +0200 schrieb Max Hetrick:
> 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 li
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
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
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Christoph Maser 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
> > wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > username: MartinBoel
> > >
> > > Please grant me access.
> >
> > Done. I hop
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 incomp
Am Mittwoch, den 16.09.2009, 15:19 +0200 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Martin Boel, Silverbullet
> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > username: MartinBoel
> >
> > Please grant me access.
>
> Done. I hope you incorporate The things Christoph Maser has mentioned
> and don't just add
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Martin Boel, Silverbullet
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 relabeled).
Ra
Hi
username: MartinBoel
Please grant me access.
Regards
Martin Boel
___
CentOS-docs mailing list
CentOS-docs@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-docs
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
>
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
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
>
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 lot of work hours in this simple workaround,
and some people may simply give
Am 14.09.09 17:07, schrieb Christoph Maser:
> Am Montag, den 14.09.2009, 16:37 +0200 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
>> You know that you'd have to write a *complete* policy for containing
>> Nagios that way? Can nagios even be seen as its own application
>> deserving its own domain or isn't much of nagio
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 apach
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
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
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 incompati
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
> cont
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. T
57 matches
Mail list logo
