On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:18:42AM -0500, Kenneth Price wrote:
> ----- "John Hinton" <webmaster@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > But I would like a bit more freedom on the sysadmin list. The ability
> > to get more in depth on particulars and include discussions of other
> > software which interacts with existing systems to aid in going
> > further... extending Centos so to speak.
> Do you think that by definition, the "system-admins" list should
> encompass that freedom? Linux system administration is not limited
> to bash scripting and configuring Apache virtual hosts, but also
> includes architecting multi-tiered, multi-faceted, multi-platform
> environments. I think the label of "system-admins" for a second list
> is going in the right direction. Maybe something a bit more specific,
> like CentOS-sysadmin-advanced? Not the best name, but conveys my idea.
To be honest, I don't think this list should be split. Instead it
should be more rigorously policed. This should be a list about CentOS,
and working with CentOS.
Generic SA type stuff (how do you do "this generic task" in script) should
not be present here; there's already enough SA type lists out there.
Similarly, Apache configuration shouldn't be here... although interaction
between Apache and SELinux probably _should_. CentOS specific questions
should be particularly welcome (which would, therefore, also include
discussion of "features" from upstream).
I guess a rule of thumb could be "if the question and answer is materially
unchanged if the OS is CentOS or Debian or Solaris or *BSD then it
doesn't belong here."
But that's just my opinion.
--
rgds
Stephen
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
