Re: link to "commercial support" page isn't really helpful

[William Warren <hescominsoon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>
>   
>> On 21/06/09 13:28, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>>     
>>>> That page does indeed reflect the current state of play - there is
>>>> *no* centos approved or recommended commercial support entity - but
>>>> it *is* something that is being worked on.
>>>>         
>>>    i realize that page is *technically* correct, but its wording is
>>> quite discouraging:
>>>       
>> If you want to propose a blob of text that might replace whats on
>> the page right now, I am sure we can plumb that in.
>>     
>
>   i'm not the right person for that as i am utterly clueless about
> what possibilities you're exploring at the moment.  that has to be
> done by someone at centos who's involved in it.
>
> rday
> --
>
> ========================================================================
> Robert P. J. Day                               Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
>
>         Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
>
> Web page:                                          http://crashcourse.ca
> Linked In:                             http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
> Twitter:                                       http://twitter.com/rpjday
> ========================================================================
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>
>   
if you are going to be the consultant and you  are recommending Centos 
then you are definitely a good person to make a suggestion as to what 
should go in there.  Take a whack at it.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos