> IMO, an answer that was just "Fixed in CDH, followups off-list" would > be deserving of a yellow card. > > IMO, if the answer was 'No but it is fixed in CDH...', that might be > sufficient (You've answered the question first and then diverted the > user). If the 'No' and the '.. it is fixed...' clauses were further > separated by say a slap for asking such a silly question on the list > when the issue holds the answer or by adding some news on the state > HDFS-xxx perhaps not yet in the issue, that'd make the mention of the > commercial go down the easier. >
On the IETF lists the convention is to distinguish between the cases explicitly through meta-data in rather than assume the reader can distinguish the authors intent or the organization basis/bias for their statement. Example: As an Apache Contributor: HDFS-xxx is available in trunk and should address your issue. As an employee of a commercial vendor: Commercial product X includes patch HDFS-xxx. Please contact me off-list if you want to learn more. - Jacob Rideout
