On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:01 AM, Ian Murray <murrayie@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Okay, maybe that was an assumption too far in regards to "respect".
>
> Perhaps not so one-sided if he had received an email reply from the devs....
> assuming he did indeed send one to KB. To be fair, it does seem pretty lifted
> from the list, which is a point of view that not everyone agrees with. He should
> really have sent the article to the devs and offered them a chance respond to
> his comments and have those worked into the article. I assume that wasn't done.
No. News reporting is about picking up and distilling the sentiment
of what's going on. The article has done that. It doesn't have to be
a complete factual research project with totally "fair and balanced"
chances for everyone to have their say. If the Devs had responded,
that would have been nice, but not a requirement.
> As for the other side of the point of view, please refer to JH's response to me
> comment. I'll paraphrase for you: You can still take it or leave it.
It doesn't matter how many times you say it, it's still wrong. JH's
responses are absolutely out of line and if I were KB I would be
seriously sitting down with him to have a chat about his attitude. He
doesn't seem to realize that telling people to f*ck off is not
acceptable behavior, no matter who you are or what you do.
It doesn't matter if you provide something "for free", because it's
not free. Everyone who uses CentOS invests significant time and
energy into it. Choosing CentOS was based on claims on the web site,
and the promise of an open alternative to Redhat, not "an open
alternative when we get around to it, and by the way, just be happy we
deem it worthy to give you anything at all."
The attitudes against any user who has a question about releases
significantly undermines the project and is a slap in the face to
everyone who has chosen to support and proselytize CentOS throughout
the years. The idea that the Devs are the only ones who do any "real"
work on the project is complete BS. It was the *users* who put all
the hard work into implementing CentOS and building up the usage
numbers, not JH and the CentOS project Devs.
Also, based on this post where JH throws around the numbers [1], one
can only assume that the real reason behind keeping the dev process
closed is to maintain the egos of those on the inside -- since all
avenues of logic seem to have been exhausted.
// Brian Mathis
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/centos@xxxxxxxxxx/msg69365.html
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
