On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 13:42 -0500, Ron Blizzard wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 5:35 AM, David Suhendrik <david@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > =D, Someone make me confused, and just a make sure here...
> > I'm so sorry for this...
>
> I was worried too, on the day I first saw the message. But I found (on
> that day) that the worst that would have happened would have been a
> name change for the distribution -- and now even that issue is no
> longer a problem.
>
To all:
It's natural for folks to worry, somteimes needlessly, when disruptions
are discovered. But one should not let their emotions drive their
behavior - i.e. worry, in and of itself, is not a useful strategy.
Rather, taek that initial "worry", understand what causes it, mix it
with your knowledge of the project's longer-term hisory, your judgment
of the individuals (developed over years of watching them), sit back,
have a cold beverage and engage the "patience" switch.
Wory should continue only if you see activity counter to
desires/expectations. It should not be bolstered by an (apparent) lack
of activity as that is only the results of necessary behind-the-scenes
machinations, delays as multiple responsibilities compete for time and
attention, etc. Of course, if *extended* periods (depending on your
level of subservience to the "immediate gratification" impulse) occurs,
then one should rationally switch modes to "worry" again.
To the Centos crew, you should have patience with the occasional users
that are unable to exercise such patience because, as we all know, there
is nothing more worrisome or louder than an extended silence.
Perhaps an aperiodic post, taking very little time, of the small steps
taken/accomplished would help assuage the savage beast?
--
Bill
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
