On 04/20/2011 09:18 AM, Brian Mathis wrote: > 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. For the record, I brought KB into this project ... not the other way around.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
