On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Ned Slider <ned@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I see two types of user - those who just want it to work out of the box
> with a Windows-like point and click interface to configure things
> without really having any clue what is happening under the bonnet, and
> those who want to assemble a system from the component parts and have a
> fuller understanding of how their system works.
There's also a big middle ground where you want to set up a system for
someone else to manage and not have them call you everything they need
a small change. Like a remote office where you want the office
manager to be able to manage users/groups and maybe even give a new
printer a name to match the label they stuck on it - and you wouldn't
trust them to be root at a command line. Or a friend who wants a home
file server with the potential for adding other services.
> For the latter, I wrote
> the Postfix series of guides on the Wiki
>
> http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos#head-0facb50d5796bee0bd394636c32ffa9a997a6ab5
>
> which were designed to be modular and extensible, allowing folks to
> start off with a basic Postfix mail server and add such functionality as
> spam/virus filtering or authentication etc to their setup as and when
> required, learning the underlying technologies as they go.
Things like that are fine for pros. How much time should a
non-technical person allow, starting from scratch and nothing but
instructions they haven't read yet, before they would have a safe,
working, email server? And really, why should they care about the
underlying technology? Standard protocols are standard protocols.
> Personally I would rather learn how to do something myself rather than
> have it pre-configured in such a way as someone else deems appropriate.
> That way when it breaks I have a clue how to fix it. So for me, a SIG
> needs to be little more than a set of tried and tested documentation
Yes, that is exactly the point of SME/ClearOS. First, they don't
break much because their combinations of packages are well tested
together, and second, if they do break, the authors and large base of
users running the same thing are going to collaborate on the fix. If
you assemble a bunch of pieces yourself out of the bare CentOS tools
you are on your own. Again, that's fine for pros - and anyone getting
paid to repeat work that has been done over and over again (sometimes
right, sometimes badly...).
> I don't want/need a pre-configued
> installable ISO image or whatever that has already made lots of
> predetermined choices for me.
No one is forcing you to use a known working configuration if you
really want the toolbox. But be realistic about how much time it has
cost you. The great thing about software is how re-usable it is - and
except for users/groups and ip addresses, that pretty much applies to
configurations too. So a configuration that provides a good service
in one place can do the same in a lot of places without wasting a lot
of time to reproduce it.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
