Re: [CentOS] *SOLVED* How to install LedgerSMB on Centos 5
On Sat, 08 Aug 2009 21:53:21 -0500 Johnny Hughes wrote: > maybe replace "WORKING_DIR" with ledgersmb (and awap the order of the 2) Much thanks for the steer! I now have LedgerSMB up and running. (Haven't a clue what to do with it yet, but it's running and I can log into it.) For anyone else who wants to install LedgerSMB on Centos, this is what I did to make it go. I downloaded ledgersmb-1.2.17-1.noarch.rpm from sourceforge, and installed the following dependencies: postgresql-8.1.11-1.el5_1.1.i386 perl-version-0.7203-1.el5.i386 perl-Class-Std-0.0.8-1.el5.rf.noarch perl-Config-Std-0.0.4-1.el5.rf.noarch perl-Smart-Comments-1.0.3-1.el5.rf.noarch perl-TimeDate-1.16-5.el5.noarch perl-MailTools-1.77-1.el5.centos.noarch perl-Locale-Maketext-Lexicon-0.62-1.el5.noarch perl-DBI-1.52-2.el5.i386 perl-DBD-Pg-1.49-2.el5_3.1.i386 perl-MIME-Lite-3.01-5.el5.noarch postgresql-server-8.1.11-1.el5_1.1.i386 perl-BSD-Resource-1.28-1.fc6.1.i386 mod_perl-2.0.4-6.el5.i386 I then edited /etc/httpd/conf.d/ledgersmb.conf and changed the Alias line to read like this: Alias /ledgersmb /usr/share/ledgersmb I then changed all instances of WORKING_DIR in /etc/httpd/conf.d/ledgersmb.conf to "ledgersmb" (without the quotes). I then edited /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf in two places. I changed the line that says "AddHandler cgi-script .cgi" to read "AddHandler cgi-script .cgi .pl". I also changed the section that read: Options FollowSymLinks AllowOverride None so it now reads: Options FollowSymLinks +ExecCGI AllowOverride None There is a short set of instructions that can be read with this command: rpm -qi ledgersmb After following those instructions, I can now log into ledgersmb. -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Ian Murray wrote: > I can't say I have been following this thread in its entirety, but the > beauty (?) of free speech is that even the ill-informed get to have a say. > :o) > > Anyway, I think there is a general problem with the name Community > ENterprise OS. Well, Community can't refer to us users because every O/S has > a community, including Windows. So at first glance at the name, I would say > that CentOS was produced by the community but that clearly isn't the > case, as we know, so perhaps a simple name change would suffice: CsentOS... > Closed-Shop Enterprise OS. Now, I bet that sounds like a criticism and I bet > it smarts a bit. It's not meant to be either, just simply the truth. > Actually, while we are on, where does the Enterprise bit come from in the > name?... because I keep hearing that if you want to anything more than is > currently being offered (speed of delivery,deadlines, trust that it isn't > all going to fall apart, etc.), then go and buy upstream or use another > distribution. That's a fair argument, but then remove the 'Enterprise' from > the title... it's misleading as it suggests its suitable for the enterprise. > > So, I suggest the product is renamed as... > > Closed-Shop-Binary-Compatible-With-Upstream-OS... CSbcwuOS... not as snappy > but much closer to the goals and project structure, as far as I, as an > outsider, can tell. I'm a CentOS user, that's about it. I do what I can to promote CentOS, I "wrote" a Wiki entry for installing CentOS on a particular laptop (basically just a matter of filling out a form) and I answer some really, really simple questions on the Forums. That's what I know, so I try to do what I can. But even though my "contributions" to the CentOS Project are about as minimal as you can get, I still consider myself a part of the CentOS community. Quite bluntly, no one needs me trying to tell anyone how to build CentOS. And I can see no reason for community input in that process as the goal is simple -- a community rebuild of Red Hat -- 100% binary compatibility. This is why people use CentOS and what they expect it to be. What the rebuild process takes is competency and, unless you know something I don't know, the developers seem to be pretty damn competent to me. What really irritates me about all this criticism at this time is that the developers have been putting out a great distribution, true to its mandate, despite some less than perfect conditions. They recently took a stand, have averted a crisis -- and are still in the middle of ironing out other problems. This is *not* the time to dump on them. This is the time to sit back, chill, and see how everything shakes out. > I am sure a lot of people, including myself, are now asking how fragile this > project is and what risk that fragility poses to our individual ventures. > CentOS itself lives in a "meritocracy" and right now CentOS's merit is going > down quite considerably. Not a criticism, just a reminder like so many > others that the project may needs to adapt to progress. "Adapt to progress?" It's a cliche, but what's it supposed to mean here? What is the "progress" you want CentOS to "adapt to?" How is "progress" supposed to work on a "rebuild" project? I asked that of someone else in this thread. I'm honestly curious as to what you want to "progress" toward? Personally the reason I like and use CentOS is because it stays true to its roots. Of all the Linux distributions, CentOS probably has the least wiggle room of any. I'm absolutely ignorant of the development process -- but to me (from the outside) it seems more like a "mechanical" exercise than an artistic endeavor. What "community input" would change any of this? As for the bit about CentOS seeming "fragile," I ask, what makes you think that? I certainly don't look at it that way. Until the "Open Letter" I didn't even know there were any major issues (though I did sense a little tenseness). And despite those issues, a great distribution was released and updated. Now that some major problems have been ironed (and, I assume, others will be ironed out) what makes you think the project is suddenly more "fragile" now then it was before? I think you ask for real problems when *everyone* has a say in how the community should "progress?" I've rambled on too long. But seriously, what is you want? CentOS is a great Linux distribution, so what's the problem? -- RonB -- Using CentOS 5.3 ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Johnny Hughes wrote: > If you mean that I can be an arrogant SOB sometimes, then YES, we (and > my wife) can agree. > Before making an admission like that, you should re-read http://wwwf.centos.org/127_story.html?storyid=127 I thought then and think now that you were 'way too humble in dealing with that blithering idiot. Regards ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
> 4 million unique machines do not agree with you, regardless of what you > want to believe. I don't think the machines have an opinion, either way. :o) Seriously, I suppose you are using the '4 million machines we must be doing something right' argument which is fair comment, if perhaps a touch arrogant, IMHO. Have you rechecked that number after this thread?!? CentOS's success is based on confidence in the product and the 'support' infrastructure that surrounds it (i.e. upgrades, security, etc - I don't mean break/fix). Those 4 million machines are relying on a handful of (dedicated and hardworking) individuals. What is the contingency if any one of those gets long term sick, personal crisis or something worse? You only get contingency when you bring ppl in, pass on the knowledge, etc. This discussion harks back to the slowness of the release 5.3, were a wedding got in the way. Not doubt the 'core' team at CentOS are some pretty (scratch that... very) smart and hardworking guys but you are not the only ones in the CentOS world. > CentOS is now what it has been for the last 5 years. > It is not any different now than it ever has been. Why pick a name that was so misleading, then? Anyway, best of luck with it all. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] ledgersmb installation
Frank Cox wrote: > I'm attempting to install ledgersmb on Centos 5 and I'm sure that I've missed > something. > > After doing the initial installation, I get a 404 when I get to the part of > the > instructions that tell me to go to http://localhost/ledgersmb/admin.pl > > /etc/httpd/conf.d/ledgersmb.conf contains the following line: > > Alias /usr/share/ledgersmb WORKING_DIR > > /usr/share/ledgersmb exists and contains a file named admin.pl > > /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf contains the following line: > > Include conf.d/*.conf > > But when I go to http://localhost/ledgersmb/admin.pl I get this entry in the > apache log: > > 127.0.0.1 - - [08/Aug/2009:15:47:30 -0600] "GET /ledgersmb/admin.pl HTTP/1.1" > 40 > 4 291 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.12) > Gecko/2009072711 > CentOS/3.0.12-1.el5.centos Firefox/3.0.12" > > What have I missed here? > maybe replace "WORKING_DIR" with ledgersmb (and awap the order of the 2) ... the purpose of the Alias command is covered here: http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_alias.html signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 20:01 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > If you mean that I can be an arrogant SOB sometimes, then YES, we (and > my wife) can agree. > > I also can certainly try to be nicer, yes. I am very tired of this whole thread - I think you have covered it well. But I will say this...you were always the nice one in CentOS and I think this list has suffered some from your lack of interaction. Craig -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sunday 09 August 2009 00:50:16 Marko A. Jennings wrote:
> Your statement implies that people that have not contributed to a certain
> goal cannot possibly have a good suggestion.
Of course, this is a very common and useful line of reasoning in human
society. Put shortly, it increases signal-to-noise ratio.
Being a theoretical physicist, I can confirm that I will flat-out refuse to
listen to any idea or suggestion (regarding physics) from a person who doesn't
at least hold a PhD degree in the area. I expect to find constructive/useful
suggestions only from peers, simply because amateur thinking is just too naive
or irrelevant. My typical response is on the lines of "go learn first, come and
suggest after".
If I were a chess master, I would never listen to advice from a person who
played (and won) less than (at least) 500 chess games, against appreciative
opponents.
If I were attorney defending a man charged for murder, I would be the one to
give suggestions what to do, not the other way around.
If I were a doctor, I would be the one prescribing the therapy to my patient,
and would refuse to listen to his ideas about what therapy he needs.
If I were a CentOS developer, I would accept suggestions only from a person
who proved to be almost equal in skill, has a similar point of view regarding
my project and can thus be trusted.
If I were an expert in any area of life, I would simply refuse to listen to
non-experts regarding the topic of my expertize. It keeps noise low and signal
high. Human society functions very well when upholding to this behavior.
Besides, an amateur giving suggestions to an expert is usually considered
foolish at best, or rude in worse cases, even by third parties.
> Following that line of
> thought, we should all shut up and let our respective governments do
> whatever they please because most of us have not been public servants.
If the governments were made of experts, than yes, we should.
Unfortunately, governments are typically not made of experts, but of
opportunists. Name one president of that has been elected because he has a PhD in political
sciences/history/law/whatever, or because he had enough hands-on experience in
governing the state (maybe without a formal degree). Even if one such exists,
I doubt he would listen to whatever random non-initiated group of people are
"suggesting".
Also, people who are involved in politics are usually given power because they
are well advertized by their political parties, not because they have proper
expertize in governing the state.
> And even if the suggestion (or criticism, as lots of suggestions have been
> labeled as of lately) is not valid, there are kinder and more polite ways
> of responding to them than those we have experienced in this thread.
Suppose an amateur gives a suggestion to an expert. This is how it typically
rolls out:
First of all, if the amateur hopes to be listened to, he needs to give a
suggestion in a way that is *humble enough*, typically in a form of a question
("please tell me why is not feasible thing to do? Or is it?"),
demonstrating his faith in expert's authority and superior knowledge on the
subject. Criticism is completely out of question --- the amateur has not
demonstrated enough competence to be considered a worthy critic (he wouldn't
be an amateur in that case).
The expert usually kindly answers that is not feasible for
or reason. The amateur can be happy or sad about it, but he should
appreciate the authoritative answer and leave it at that.
But if the amateur pushes the suggestion again, usually in a form that looks
more like a critique, or whines because his suggestion/wish was not
acknowledged, the most polite thing an expert will generally do is to ignore
him. Silence is a polite way of saying "your suggestion is not good enough,
give up and go away".
If the amateur keeps insisting that he has a point and keeps building pressure
on the expert, the expert will get annoyed enough and eventually respond in a
way that gets increasingly rude ("Demonstrate that you have competence before
you insist that I listen to you.", "Who are you to play smart with me here,
you low life form?" and such).
And the expert has a good point here, because the amateur was being quite rude
by pushing his suggestion beyond any good measure, after being given a polite
NAK.
All in all, the developers are not required to even listen to "community
suggestions", let alone obey them. They know *their* job better than the rest
of us (non-developers) know *their* job. Unless you can prove yourself to be a
peer developer (a process which takes a lot of time, effort, expertize,
humility and good relations with other developers), you have no business
giving suggestions and expecting to be listened to. Meritocracy is not
democracy. You can ask questions, and be thankful when/if you are given an
answer from a developer. If you don't like the answer, it's your prob
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Ian Murray wrote: > I can't say I have been following this thread in its entirety, but the > beauty (?) of free speech is that even the ill-informed get to have a > say. :o) > > Anyway, I think there is a general problem with the name Community > ENterprise OS. Well, Community can't refer to us users because every O/S > has a community, including Windows. So at first glance at the name, I > would say that CentOS was produced by the community but that clearly > isn't the case, as we know, so perhaps a simple name change would > suffice: CsentOS... Closed-Shop Enterprise OS. Now, I bet that sounds > like a criticism and I bet it smarts a bit. It's not meant to be either, > just simply the truth. Actually, while we are on, where does the > Enterprise bit come from in the name?... because I keep hearing that if > you want to anything more than is currently being offered (speed of > delivery,deadlines, trust that it isn't all going to fall apart, etc.), > then go and buy upstream or use another distribution. That's a fair > argument, but then remove the 'Enterprise' from the title... it's > misleading as it suggests its suitable for the enterprise. > 4 million unique machines do not agree with you, regardless of what you want to believe. > So, I suggest the product is renamed as... > > Closed-Shop-Binary-Compatible-With-Upstream-OS... CSbcwuOS... not as > snappy but much closer to the goals and project structure, as far as I, > as an outsider, can tell. > > I am sure a lot of people, including myself, are now asking how fragile > this project is and what risk that fragility poses to our individual > ventures. CentOS itself lives in a "meritocracy" and right now CentOS's > merit is going down quite considerably. Not a criticism, just a reminder > like so many others that the project may needs to adapt to progress. CentOS is now what it has been for the last 5 years. It is not any different now than it ever has been. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
I can't say I have been following this thread in its entirety, but the beauty (?) of free speech is that even the ill-informed get to have a say. :o) Anyway, I think there is a general problem with the name Community ENterprise OS. Well, Community can't refer to us users because every O/S has a community, including Windows. So at first glance at the name, I would say that CentOS was produced by the community but that clearly isn't the case, as we know, so perhaps a simple name change would suffice: CsentOS... Closed-Shop Enterprise OS. Now, I bet that sounds like a criticism and I bet it smarts a bit. It's not meant to be either, just simply the truth. Actually, while we are on, where does the Enterprise bit come from in the name?... because I keep hearing that if you want to anything more than is currently being offered (speed of delivery,deadlines, trust that it isn't all going to fall apart, etc.), then go and buy upstream or use another distribution. That's a fair argument, but then remove the 'Enterprise' from the title... it's misleading as it suggests its suitable for the enterprise. So, I suggest the product is renamed as... Closed-Shop-Binary-Compatible-With-Upstream-OS... CSbcwuOS... not as snappy but much closer to the goals and project structure, as far as I, as an outsider, can tell. I am sure a lot of people, including myself, are now asking how fragile this project is and what risk that fragility poses to our individual ventures. CentOS itself lives in a "meritocracy" and right now CentOS's merit is going down quite considerably. Not a criticism, just a reminder like so many others that the project may needs to adapt to progress. From: Johnny Hughes To: CentOS mailing list Sent: Sunday, 9 August, 2009 1:44:47 Subject: Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure Marko A. Jennings wrote: > On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robert wrote: >> >> >>> please stop poking the bears... ;-> >>> >>> it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the >>> people running it should just move on and go away as asked >> +1 How easy it is to criticize people who have put in a >> tremendous amount of hours, without pay, working on the CentOS >> project. There is always room for improvement, but the criticism from >> those who have not put in the hours over the past years is not >> deserved. > > Lanny, > > Your statement implies that people that have not contributed to a certain > goal cannot possibly have a good suggestion. Following that line of > thought, we should all shut up and let our respective governments do > whatever they please because most of us have not been public servants. > > And even if the suggestion (or criticism, as lots of suggestions have been > labeled as of lately) is not valid, there are kinder and more polite ways > of responding to them than those we have experienced in this thread. > > Marko > > Following that line of thought, we should all shut up and let our > respective governments do whatever CentOS is not a government or a Democracy ... it was not designed to be. It is a product that we produce for people to use or not use. They get to choose to participate in the mailing lists, the forums, etc. They get to choose to donate money or servers or bandwidth to the project. They do NOT get to tell us what to build, when to build it, how to use donated resources, etc. Just like I don't get to login to your servers and do what I want when you use CentOS. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Marko A. Jennings wrote: > On Sat, August 8, 2009 8:44 pm, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> Marko A. Jennings wrote: >>> On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote: On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robert wrote: > please stop poking the bears... ;-> > > it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and > the > people running it should just move on and go away as asked +1 How easy it is to criticize people who have put in a tremendous amount of hours, without pay, working on the CentOS project. There is always room for improvement, but the criticism from those who have not put in the hours over the past years is not deserved. >>> Lanny, >>> >>> Your statement implies that people that have not contributed to a >>> certain >>> goal cannot possibly have a good suggestion. Following that line of >>> thought, we should all shut up and let our respective governments do >>> whatever they please because most of us have not been public servants. >>> >>> And even if the suggestion (or criticism, as lots of suggestions have >>> been >>> labeled as of lately) is not valid, there are kinder and more polite >>> ways >>> of responding to them than those we have experienced in this thread. >>> >>> Marko >>> >>> Following that line of thought, we should all shut up and let our >>> respective governments do whatever >> CentOS is not a government or a Democracy ... it was not designed to be. >> It is a product that we produce for people to use or not use. >> >> They get to choose to participate in the mailing lists, the forums, etc.> > >> They get to choose to donate money or servers or bandwidth to the project. >> >> They do NOT get to tell us what to build, when to build it, how to use >> donated resources, etc. Just like I don't get to login to your servers >> and do what I want when you use CentOS. > > Where exactly have I said, or even implied that? All I have tried to > convey is that when people offer suggestions, they ought to be considered > and answered in a polite manner. As I said before, it's not what is being > said, but rather how. > > Do we agree on this? If you mean that I can be an arrogant SOB sometimes, then YES, we (and my wife) can agree. I also can certainly try to be nicer, yes. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 19:37 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > William L. Maltby wrote: > > > > > I only have one question that I want to add to this gawd-awful thread > > now. > > > > Who is the project serving? The "core" themselves or a "community" of > > users as well? If that is effectively and accurately answered, then the > > dynamics of the relationship(s) between users of the project and the > > "core" can be more clearly stated and understood. > > Well, then I think I can easily clear this up. Our "Project" purpose > has been stated for 4 years, and it has not changed. > > It has been decided from the beginning and articulated many times. > > > > > This one definition might have saved 90% of this thread. > > > > How we manage the Project is not a community based, it was never > intended to be community based, and it never will be community based. > > Hopefully this clears up any ambiguity. There was never any on *my* part. But maybe it will help those who mis-understood. > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, August 8, 2009 8:44 pm, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Marko A. Jennings wrote: >> On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote: >>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robert wrote: >>> >>> please stop poking the bears... ;-> it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the people running it should just move on and go away as asked >>> +1 How easy it is to criticize people who have put in a >>> tremendous amount of hours, without pay, working on the CentOS >>> project. There is always room for improvement, but the criticism from >>> those who have not put in the hours over the past years is not >>> deserved. >> >> Lanny, >> >> Your statement implies that people that have not contributed to a >> certain >> goal cannot possibly have a good suggestion. Following that line of >> thought, we should all shut up and let our respective governments do >> whatever they please because most of us have not been public servants. >> >> And even if the suggestion (or criticism, as lots of suggestions have >> been >> labeled as of lately) is not valid, there are kinder and more polite >> ways >> of responding to them than those we have experienced in this thread. >> >> Marko >> >> Following that line of thought, we should all shut up and let our >> respective governments do whatever > > CentOS is not a government or a Democracy ... it was not designed to be. > It is a product that we produce for people to use or not use. > > They get to choose to participate in the mailing lists, the forums, etc.> > They get to choose to donate money or servers or bandwidth to the project. > > They do NOT get to tell us what to build, when to build it, how to use > donated resources, etc. Just like I don't get to login to your servers > and do what I want when you use CentOS. Where exactly have I said, or even implied that? All I have tried to convey is that when people offer suggestions, they ought to be considered and answered in a polite manner. As I said before, it's not what is being said, but rather how. Do we agree on this? ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Marko A. Jennings wrote: > On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robert wrote: >> >> >>> please stop poking the bears... ;-> >>> >>> it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the >>> people running it should just move on and go away as asked >> +1 How easy it is to criticize people who have put in a >> tremendous amount of hours, without pay, working on the CentOS >> project. There is always room for improvement, but the criticism from >> those who have not put in the hours over the past years is not >> deserved. > > Lanny, > > Your statement implies that people that have not contributed to a certain > goal cannot possibly have a good suggestion. Following that line of > thought, we should all shut up and let our respective governments do > whatever they please because most of us have not been public servants. > > And even if the suggestion (or criticism, as lots of suggestions have been > labeled as of lately) is not valid, there are kinder and more polite ways > of responding to them than those we have experienced in this thread. > > Marko > > Following that line of thought, we should all shut up and let our > respective governments do whatever CentOS is not a government or a Democracy ... it was not designed to be. It is a product that we produce for people to use or not use. They get to choose to participate in the mailing lists, the forums, etc. They get to choose to donate money or servers or bandwidth to the project. They do NOT get to tell us what to build, when to build it, how to use donated resources, etc. Just like I don't get to login to your servers and do what I want when you use CentOS. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On 8/8/09, Marko A. Jennings wrote: > On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote: >> On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robert wrote: >> >>> please stop poking the bears... ;-> >>> >>> it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the >>> people running it should just move on and go away as asked >> >> +1 How easy it is to criticize people who have put in a >> tremendous amount of hours, without pay, working on the CentOS >> project. There is always room for improvement, but the criticism from >> those who have not put in the hours over the past years is not >> deserved. > > Lanny, > > Your statement implies that people that have not contributed to a certain > goal cannot possibly have a good suggestion. Makro: If I implied that, I did not express myself properly. Good suggestions, if submitted in the proper way, will probably be welcome by the developers. Criticism will not be welcome. The problem will be if the people who are not developers try to take control of the project or change the goals of the project. > And even if the suggestion (or criticism, as lots of suggestions have been > labeled as of lately) is not valid, there are kinder and more polite ways > of responding to them than those we have experienced in this thread. I agree with you on that. There are more polite and courteous ways. I suspect that the recent Open Letter to Lance, brought out a lot of things that have caused the developers great stress and frustration, for a year or more and now they need a chance to recuperate and regroup. Lanny ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
William L. Maltby wrote: > On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 19:31 -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote: >> > >> Yep, I think it is because people often want to travel straight from A >> to Z without having to go through B, C, D, etc. Another subset of >> people, "the talkers" want to dictate to the "doers" how things should >> be done, often without wanting to (or perhaps without having the skills >> to) actually do any solid contributions themselves. They can safely >> just be ignored. ;o) > > I was with you up to that last line. In any organization, *sometimes* > one of the most important skills (if it is lacking in other "community" > members) is that of organizing and motivating and coordinating, ... All > of this is just "talking" (well, planning, etc. - but the results of > that is often only exhibited in "talking"). > > And what is characterized as "whining" can be seen as folks who > mistakenly believe their input, as a community member (if that's what > the "core" folks choose them to be viewed as) is valued and are trying > to contribute. > > I only have one question that I want to add to this gawd-awful thread > now. > > Who is the project serving? The "core" themselves or a "community" of > users as well? If that is effectively and accurately answered, then the > dynamics of the relationship(s) between users of the project and the > "core" can be more clearly stated and understood. Well, then I think I can easily clear this up. Our "Project" purpose has been stated for 4 years, and it has not changed. http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=3 The CentOS team provides a product that people can choose to use or not to use. It is designed to be 100% binary compatible with the upstream build. Here are our goals: http://www.centos.org/modules/tinycontent/index.php?id=5 Furthermore: The CentOS Project will build, sign and provide the packages. We will provide an infrastructure to distribute the packages. We will provide an infrastructure where the Community can be involved and help each other (via things like a Wiki, the Forums, the Mailing Lists, the bugzilla and IRC). These things are where we want community participation. We have even added Special Interest Groups where we accept some code from the community for some things. Each SIG has a team member who is responsible to validate the code. From time to time, we will PULL a community member INTO the Development team. We have done this on a number of occasions. I'll give you a brief history with example: 1. CentOS 3.1 released as part of cAos foundation early 2004. 2. I (Johnny Hughes) was added as a CentOS team member from the Community in late 2004, as were Karanbir Singh and Tru Huynh. Several other people (Lance Davis, Donavan Nelson, Russ Herrold, John Newbigin) were already team members. 3. The CentOS Project forms and moves away from the cAos Foundation in March of 2005. 4. There have been other team members added from the Community since then including Jim Perrin, Ralph Angenendt, and Tim Verhoeven. 5. NedSlider and Akemi Yagi are added as Forum Moderators. Akemi has also been given the added responsibility to make the Plus kernel changes. When we pull people in from the Community and give them increased responsibility, we do so after many months of interaction. Not everyone has access to the "Signing Keys", Not everyone has access to make changes to www.centos.org, Not everyone has access to submit packages to the builder. Not everyone is Forum Moderator. Not everyone has Root access to all CentOS infrastructure machines. We have some other repositories (Extras, CentOSPlus, maybe in the future contrib) HOWEVER, these are not trying to be 3rd party repos or build the latest and greatest things. They are designed to add ENTERPRISE level software that we are going to maintain for the lifetime of the project. If we add something, then someone has given assurances that they will take care of it for 7 years. There are already plenty of 3rd party repos available including these: http://wiki.centos.org/AdditionalResources/Repositories?action=show&redirect=Repositories We do not desire to REPLACE any of these repositories ... these are INDEED part of the community as well. If you have something to contribute to a 3rd party repository, then contact them and ask how they would like your help. When we add something to CentOS, then someone in the core team is going to maintain it for 7 years. Every package will be verified by a team member and be the responsibility of a team member. If that team member leaves, someone else in the team will maintain that package. Therefore, adding things to CentOS will not be something that is taken lightly ... see 3rd party repos above. > > My observations in the past has indicated that this is not truly decided > and inculcated in the project's "core" members. It has been decided from the beginning and articulated many times. > > This one definition might have saved 9
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
> Who is the project serving? The "core" themselves or a "community" of > users as well? If that is effectively and accurately answered, then the > dynamics of the relationship(s) between users of the project and the > "core" can be more clearly stated and understood. In the end, most F/LOSS projects seem to be created to "scratch an itch" as it were in the founder/developers. That "itch" can be anything from needing a tool for a problem to something as noble as bringing technology to others who couldn't otherwise afford it. What I see this group's "itch" being is the need to bring a free (as in beer) version of what IMO is probably the most widely recognized enterprise Linux distribution to those who want the benefits of that OS but don't need/want the support package built in at said upstream vendor. If that means the devs are more demanding of those they let into the ranks then your typical F/LOSS project, so be it. From my perspective it shows they are serious about keeping the project true to it's aims, and that makes it easier to sell CentOS to my boss. A meritocracy maybe, but I haven't seen any business out there that runs like a typical F/LOSS project. I was hired into the firm I admin because I was able to demonstrate I had the skills needed, and my boss could verify those skills. In a project like CentOS it's not easy to verify a person's skillset so the process of earning your way into the "inner circle" is an acceptable, in my view, way to show a person is cut out for position. CentOS in this case seems to have more stringent requirements. Myself, I know I'm not cut out to be a dev so I hang around various mailing lists, poking my head up when I have answers to questions and/or questions myself. My contribution to Linux as a whole is to work on promoting it within my sphere of influence. That I can do, and it allows me to promote CentOS along the way. -- Drew "Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood." --Marie Curie ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 16:14 -0700, Robert wrote: > > > > This presents a ripe opportunity for a perception of > > "unwarranted criticism", "whining" by someone who paid > > nothing, "lack of appreciation for all the *free* hard work > > we do", etc. > > > > > > > > > -- > > Bill > > > > Bill, > > Good points... > > yet you forgot about "presentation" if a person makes a poor > presentation of possibly helpful and/or valid criticism, then it is similar > to the wisdom that says... > > As a jewel of gold in a swine's snout, so is a fair woman which is without > discretion. Well, this thread had presented so many examples of "presentation" issues, by both sides (IMO), that I felt it need not be mentioned (and it was mentioned by another already). Plus I felt if I expressed my feelings about "presentation" I'd seen over time it would not add anything *useful* and might make the thread even less productive. I think Dag's recent post puts it best. And if one accepts what he suggests, there's a lot of implications attached to it that I think some folks in the project wouldn't like. But to each his own. > > plus... > > ...maybe some are forgetting that the upstream does close to 700 million a > year in sales and has no debt... after all the number crunching it appears > they show a profit in the 80 million a year range. > > in my humble estimation, CentOS if run reasonably well and truly supported > by it's community could have a good fraction of to a full 1% of that > yearly > > The Team does extremely well technically now, yet imagine how well the > CentOS Dev team could do if they could take paychecks as well as hire other > needed positions. eh? > > I'd like to see CentOS flourish in all possible ways !!! Ditto. And if there is a common and unifying attitude adopted by everyone inside the project that includes a concious effort to make folks feel welcome, within acceptable and well-documented limits, then the chance of success is increased. Without the "buy-in" to a "corporate ethos" by the project members, success is likely harder or less. But it may still satisfy their individual objectives, and so be considered successful. But I've seen other projects come and go. This one is no different. Problems almost always include (and even stem from) one thing that is the most difficult to obtain in a project of this sort - the suppressing of an ego-centric outlook for a more altruistic attitude and behavior. Not an easy thing when there's no paycheck with which to buy commitment. > > i want to ride on the CentOS Lear when it is ready please ;-> > > again, it really will be best if people would "stop poking the bears". > > - rh > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, August 8, 2009 4:04 pm, Lanny Marcus wrote: > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robert wrote: > > >> please stop poking the bears... ;-> >> >> it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the >> people running it should just move on and go away as asked > > +1 How easy it is to criticize people who have put in a > tremendous amount of hours, without pay, working on the CentOS > project. There is always room for improvement, but the criticism from > those who have not put in the hours over the past years is not > deserved. Lanny, Your statement implies that people that have not contributed to a certain goal cannot possibly have a good suggestion. Following that line of thought, we should all shut up and let our respective governments do whatever they please because most of us have not been public servants. And even if the suggestion (or criticism, as lots of suggestions have been labeled as of lately) is not valid, there are kinder and more polite ways of responding to them than those we have experienced in this thread. Marko Following that line of thought, we should all shut up and let our respective governments do whatever ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
> > This presents a ripe opportunity for a perception of > "unwarranted criticism", "whining" by someone who paid > nothing, "lack of appreciation for all the *free* hard work > we do", etc. > > > > > -- > Bill > Bill, Good points... yet you forgot about "presentation" if a person makes a poor presentation of possibly helpful and/or valid criticism, then it is similar to the wisdom that says... As a jewel of gold in a swine's snout, so is a fair woman which is without discretion. plus... ...maybe some are forgetting that the upstream does close to 700 million a year in sales and has no debt... after all the number crunching it appears they show a profit in the 80 million a year range. in my humble estimation, CentOS if run reasonably well and truly supported by it's community could have a good fraction of to a full 1% of that yearly The Team does extremely well technically now, yet imagine how well the CentOS Dev team could do if they could take paychecks as well as hire other needed positions. eh? I'd like to see CentOS flourish in all possible ways !!! i want to ride on the CentOS Lear when it is ready please ;-> again, it really will be best if people would "stop poking the bears". - rh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 15:04 -0500, Lanny Marcus wrote: > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robert wrote: > > > > please stop poking the bears... ;-> > > > > it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the > > people running it should just move on and go away as asked > > +1 How easy it is to criticize people who have put in a > tremendous amount of hours, without pay, working on the CentOS > project. There is always room for improvement, but the criticism from > those who have not put in the hours over the past years is not > deserved. Possible Perception Problem? When a non-contributing user sees an opportunity for improvement in the projects , the user should not only make a suggestion but also state why it is a good idea and situations that support the need for an improvement. This presents a ripe opportunity for a perception of "unwarranted criticism", "whining" by someone who paid nothing, "lack of appreciation for all the *free* hard work we do", etc. > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 18:28 +0100, Ned Slider wrote: > > Sorry Alan, but with the greatest respect I believe it important that > these types of discussions are allowed to happen openly within the > community. This thread was started on a community mailing list by a > member of that community expressing what he would like to see from his > Community Enterprise OS. Why people feel the need to be so aggressive, > I'm not sure but we are all adults and I'm sure no one will be mortally > wounded by a few ill chosen words in the heat of debate. ++ > > Some within the community have expressed what they would like from their > Community Enterprise OS and the developers have made it perfectly clear > that it is their Community Enterprise OS (not the community's), and that > the community can go whistle (my interpretation). ++ > That's a usefuldiscussion to have openly and in public IMHO. Please do > not try to stifle it. ++ > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 19:31 -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote: > > Yep, I think it is because people often want to travel straight from A > to Z without having to go through B, C, D, etc. Another subset of > people, "the talkers" want to dictate to the "doers" how things should > be done, often without wanting to (or perhaps without having the skills > to) actually do any solid contributions themselves. They can safely > just be ignored. ;o) I was with you up to that last line. In any organization, *sometimes* one of the most important skills (if it is lacking in other "community" members) is that of organizing and motivating and coordinating, ... All of this is just "talking" (well, planning, etc. - but the results of that is often only exhibited in "talking"). And what is characterized as "whining" can be seen as folks who mistakenly believe their input, as a community member (if that's what the "core" folks choose them to be viewed as) is valued and are trying to contribute. I only have one question that I want to add to this gawd-awful thread now. Who is the project serving? The "core" themselves or a "community" of users as well? If that is effectively and accurately answered, then the dynamics of the relationship(s) between users of the project and the "core" can be more clearly stated and understood. My observations in the past has indicated that this is not truly decided and inculcated in the project's "core" members. This one definition might have saved 90% of this thread. > - -- > Mike A. Harris > http://mharris.ca | https://twitter.com/mikeaharris > -- Bill ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] ledgersmb installation
I'm attempting to install ledgersmb on Centos 5 and I'm sure that I've missed something. After doing the initial installation, I get a 404 when I get to the part of the instructions that tell me to go to http://localhost/ledgersmb/admin.pl /etc/httpd/conf.d/ledgersmb.conf contains the following line: Alias /usr/share/ledgersmb WORKING_DIR /usr/share/ledgersmb exists and contains a file named admin.pl /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf contains the following line: Include conf.d/*.conf But when I go to http://localhost/ledgersmb/admin.pl I get this entry in the apache log: 127.0.0.1 - - [08/Aug/2009:15:47:30 -0600] "GET /ledgersmb/admin.pl HTTP/1.1" 40 4 291 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.0.12) Gecko/2009072711 CentOS/3.0.12-1.el5.centos Firefox/3.0.12" What have I missed here? -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Robert wrote: > please stop poking the bears... ;-> > > it isn't productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the > people running it should just move on and go away as asked +1 How easy it is to criticize people who have put in a tremendous amount of hours, without pay, working on the CentOS project. There is always room for improvement, but the criticism from those who have not put in the hours over the past years is not deserved. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Dag concern is good and you are right about how CentOS people should have a solid testimony for the projects "big picture" the thing is that since day one, as near as i have experienced and can tell, most of them have many years of "rock solid CentOS work" as a testimony. rock solid! we haven't had one *MAJOR* issue with anything the Dev Team has put out since day one and that is across versions 3, 4, and 5. all of the servers have been online 24/7 for years. that is one incredible CentOS group testimony. yet, the people that are *poking the bears* (tm) in the CentOS Dev team should put up or shut up and need to work on as good a testimony in thier work lives and in their postings. some time ago, i wanted to see if our organization would be a good fit to be of assistance and i was politely told that what is required is "to do work"... i.e., *get work done* and possibly join the team... one need to really prove themselves that they have what it takes with little to no handholding. ... and not just flap their typing gums on the list please stop poking the bears... ;-> it isnt productive and many of you that are critical of CentOS and the people running it should just move on and go away as asked - rh ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, R P Herrold wrote: > On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Bob Taylor wrote: > >> Personally, it disgusts me. > >> Have I said I don't appreciate it? > > Yes, actually -- I call b*llsh*t -- you who have done nothing > are here, and eat without charge at our table, and 'it > disgusts' you > > Begone, troll Russ, I am quite concerned about your responses (from a @centos.org address). You can agree or disagree with the content of criticism, you can ignore it or refute it. But it's poor judgement to dismiss it the way you do because people have not contributed. (Unless you want users to simply shut up) It shows that you (as a project's representative) are not interested or concerned about the users. And any opinion is only worthy if coming from a contributed user (which limits you to the selected few that are in the inner circle). Is everything else b*llshit ? You equally torpedo'd Marcus Moeller who _is_ a contributing user, even if you don't think high of his contributions, I feel you should refrain from discouraging users the way you do in this thread. It's not the community fostering that we need right now. Criticism is good if you handle it well. Channel it. Enable people to contribute to fix it. Give orders and provide details. I am sure that this approach is more fruitful in the long run. A potential contributor is not willing to spend effort if there's no hope it is worthwhile. Give hope ! Show it is worthwhile ! PS We started the newsletter (which Marcus is now leading) to highlight success stories. Show who helped contributing and how one could contribute. Give credit where credit is due. More positivism... -- -- dag wieers, d...@wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors] ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, 8 Aug 2009, Bob Taylor wrote: > Personally, it disgusts me. > Have I said I don't appreciate it? Yes, actually -- I call b*llsh*t -- you who have done nothing are here, and eat without charge at our table, and 'it disgusts' you Begone, troll -- Russ herrold ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Alan Sparks wrote: > Bob Taylor wrote: >> On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 05:48 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> >>> Second, I am supposed to also kiss your ass? >>> >> Is it necessary to insult me? I have said *nothing* to you to warrant >> this. >> >> > > Jeez, people, take it offline. > -Alan > Sorry Alan, but with the greatest respect I believe it important that these types of discussions are allowed to happen openly within the community. This thread was started on a community mailing list by a member of that community expressing what he would like to see from his Community Enterprise OS. Why people feel the need to be so aggressive, I'm not sure but we are all adults and I'm sure no one will be mortally wounded by a few ill chosen words in the heat of debate. Some within the community have expressed what they would like from their Community Enterprise OS and the developers have made it perfectly clear that it is their Community Enterprise OS (not the community's), and that the community can go whistle (my interpretation). That's a useful discussion to have openly and in public IMHO. Please do not try to stifle it. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Bob Taylor wrote: > On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 05:48 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > >> >> Second, I am supposed to also kiss your ass? >> > > Is it necessary to insult me? I have said *nothing* to you to warrant > this. > > Jeez, people, take it offline. -Alan ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 05:48 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Bob Taylor wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 11:54 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > >>> Bob Taylor wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > >>> Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this > >>> loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it > >>> disgusts me. > >> It is not *wrong* ... any more than your response is *wrong*. > >> > >> Your opinion is for you and my opinion is for me. > >> > >> And the GREAT thing about open source is, there is always another > >> project if you don't like the current one. > > > > Let me add: As a *developer* you are saying the wrong things. > > > >> My point is, the CentOS team has put in an unbelievable amount of time > >> and effort to build this distribution. We will continue to do so. If > >> you like it use it. If you don't like it, don't use it. > > > > And my point is: Just *who* are you doing this "unbelievable amount of > > time and effort.." *for*? > > Not for you, for people who appreciate it. I have never been paid a > dime for any work to the CentOS project. Have I said I don't appreciate it? It so happens I do. More than I can say. Have I indicated you have been paid? > >> If someone has a major problem with the distro, then they should find > >> one that they don't have a major problem with. I don't want hard > >> feelings or anyone to be upset, but if we are not meeting your > >> expectations then you might be able to find another that does. I do not > >> think you will ... but trying is certainly better than being upset. > > > > It's your *attitude*, Johnny. I'm attempting to help you with your > > people skills. OK? It is not helpful nor desirable to talk to people in > > such an apparently arrogant manner. If you did so with clients, you most > > certainly wouldn't have any in short order and possibly be looking for > > another job. > > > > Enough said. > > > Let me see. > > First, I give you a free product that people pay thousands of dollars > for. I do so voluntarily. > > Second, I am supposed to also kiss your ass? Is it necessary to insult me? I have said *nothing* to you to warrant this. > What kind of attitude should I have when you come into my organization, > take a free product, tell me that everyone working on the project sucks, > tell me that they need to work harder and get you the free product > faster, tell me that you need to have a say in how the organization works? I said *nothing* of the sort. BTW, "my organization"??? Sheesh! -- Bob Taylor ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] BUG in httpd 2.2.3-22.el5.centos.2
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 05:59 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Mark Hedges wrote: > >> You can report problems on the CentOS bug tracker at: > >> http://bugs.centos.org/ > > > > Umm, as I said, I couldn't sign up to file a bug report. > > Nope, still broken. > > > >APPLICATION ERROR #2800 > >Invalid form security token. Did you submit the form > >twice by accident? > > > > I am not sure how you are applying for your login. > > I was able to use IE7 and IE8 on Windows XP, Firefox on Windows, and > Firefox on Linux to obtain a login. > > --- To add to that it does give an error at times on logging in. Does not matter what os/browser. Also on account creation. John ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How to Contribute to CentOS was: CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Aug 8, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote: > Dear Russ. > You don't like reputational vetting and a meritocracy, or how it is run by the people in charge who have as one goal: not distributing malware. I get it. Thank you. >> >>> Hey Russ, it's open source. You can just review the spec and >>> comment it until it's ready for release. Source could be >>> fetched directly from upstream and patches could be verified >>> easily. >> >> If you want my attention seeking to persuade, do not start a >> communication: 'Hey' as I consider it rude. > > Sorry if I was getting rude and thanks for pointing some things out. > ... > >> You (Marcus) have established yourself as irrelevant to me. >> I will not presently be supporting you for further advancement >> into the CentOS infrastructure if you seek or are proposed for >> such, until I see some 'merit' outside of talking > > ... but I must admit that your above statement is very rude to me. I'm loath to further this thread any more, but like it or not if core developers say it's closed to contributions, it's closed to contributions. I'm happy to make package suggestions on 'devel' in hopes that one developer might see merit in a package and pick it up for 'extras' or 'plus', but if not, then oh well. There is no point in whining about it. This is a small group with a very distinct goal. Provide a equivalent community supported version of a commercial Linux package and that is it. They are not out to create their own spin-off distribution, if you want that try Scientific Linux, but an IP free duplication that projects like Scientific Linux can base off of. -Ross ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Sat, 2009-08-08 at 11:05 -0400, JohnS wrote: > On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 08:28 +0200, Andrew Colin Kissa wrote: > > On 07 Aug 2009, at 8:14 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote: > > > > > (like the Contrib repo) are getting a bit clearer so I > > > guess we are on the right track. > > > > Contib repo !!! What Contrib repo ? The last time i tried to > > contribute i was told to head on to Fedora or rpmforge. > --- > Russ, > > Those of us that are in the file server business may would like to > contribute a package for centos 3 4 5 and beta6. Will you point us to a > reference link please or provide a little info. > > JohnStanley Sorry I found a link in the dev list. John ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 08:28 +0200, Andrew Colin Kissa wrote: > On 07 Aug 2009, at 8:14 AM, Marcus Moeller wrote: > > > (like the Contrib repo) are getting a bit clearer so I > > guess we are on the right track. > > Contib repo !!! What Contrib repo ? The last time i tried to > contribute i was told to head on to Fedora or rpmforge. --- Russ, Those of us that are in the file server business may would like to contribute a package for centos 3 4 5 and beta6. Will you point us to a reference link please or provide a little info. JohnStanley ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] How to Contribute to CentOS was: CentOS Project Infrastructure
Dear Russ. >>> You don't like reputational vetting and a meritocracy, or how >>> it is run by the people in charge who have as one goal: not >>> distributing malware. I get it. Thank you. > >> Hey Russ, it's open source. You can just review the spec and >> comment it until it's ready for release. Source could be >> fetched directly from upstream and patches could be verified >> easily. > > If you want my attention seeking to persuade, do not start a > communication: 'Hey' as I consider it rude. Sorry if I was getting rude and thanks for pointing some things out. ... > You (Marcus) have established yourself as irrelevant to me. > I will not presently be supporting you for further advancement > into the CentOS infrastructure if you seek or are proposed for > such, until I see some 'merit' outside of talking ... but I must admit that your above statement is very rude to me. I have started working on the project about 1 1/2 year ago, joined the promo sig and tried to promote CentOS. I personally do not see much sense in a bugtracker despite to distinguish if a bug should be tracked upstream or not. The few bugs left that are 'really' related to the project is something I am willed to look at. Al and I have already started working on the new Website Infrastructure and forum migration with quite a lot success (which can be seen in the wiki). Since March, Al is getting payed by me for his work on the project. I have offered my help on rebuilding the which was not necessary so I have aksed Karan to line out the build process to make it at least transparent as possible (which is necessary in my pov). I am continuously tracking wiki changes and fixing articles. Besides that I have started to talk with Karan about setting up a legal background for the project and offered my help in the GSoC and contributed to the necessary application docs. Besides that I have taken care of the Pulse Newsletter. This, I have all done in my 'free' time and I do not welcome your comments on that. Maybe we are working on different areas but this is not the form of respect I expect form a person like you. Btw. I would rather call myself a pusher not a talker ;) But I have agree on some points. CentOS != Fedora and note meant to be for newcomers (at least in form of contributions) and maybe a 'Board' is not possible on a project like this. But at least contributors should be welcomed and not treated like today and if a 'Contrib' repository is available it should be used as named. Otherwise I would just remove it and suggest EPEL/RPMForge instead. Best Regards Marcus ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] BUG in httpd 2.2.3-22.el5.centos.2
Mark Hedges wrote: >> You can report problems on the CentOS bug tracker at: >> http://bugs.centos.org/ > > Umm, as I said, I couldn't sign up to file a bug report. > Nope, still broken. > >APPLICATION ERROR #2800 >Invalid form security token. Did you submit the form >twice by accident? > I am not sure how you are applying for your login. I was able to use IE7 and IE8 on Windows XP, Firefox on Windows, and Firefox on Linux to obtain a login. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
[CentOS] How to Contribute to CentOS was: CentOS Project Infrastructure
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote: > 2009/8/7 R P Herrold : >> You don't like reputational vetting and a meritocracy, or how >> it is run by the people in charge who have as one goal: not >> distributing malware. I get it. Thank you. > Hey Russ, it's open source. You can just review the spec and > comment it until it's ready for release. Source could be > fetched directly from upstream and patches could be verified > easily. If you want my attention seeking to persuade, do not start a communication: 'Hey' as I consider it rude. You are right -- I 'can' but I have no plans to do so as it is not safe as stated, as trojaned content can leak in. I guess it is the case that you do not read. I have clearly said: I am just not interested in 'competing' with El Repo, or RPMforge, or EPEL ... It is also a truth I have observed that because there are doers and talkers, that after a while the doers tire of talk, withdraw from the talkers, and build a future. ... It is fantasy to think that the effort expended by the central project members would continue if 'guided' or 'controlled' by the hands of others with less technical skills And in a later piece: either people do not read, or will not believe what we write. If a person wishes to be advanced in the project, contribute to the project. [It is not clear to me WHY people think there is some huge benefit for being a 'project insider' as it is really just a chance to do more work. Early access to QA is just not that hard to earn] We are not likely to hold your hand much, but will answer questions well framed [see: /topic in #centos for the link]. Be a self starter. Do something material. Some things to do to gain my notice as a contributor of merit: 1. The bug tracker is open self serve for people to sign up. Add its RSS feed, and read every one as it crosses [I do]. Start working through the bugs to replicate or note an inability to replicate issues; Work through the bug tracker from latest to earliest, seeing if there is a similar upstream bug, or a fix, or if an issue is CentOS local. Note your results. That would be useful 2. The -docs ML is open for proposals of new content into the wiki. Add its RSS feed, and read every diff as it crosses [I do]. Fix broken stuff that can be fixed at once. Some even believe it is more useful to re-write documentation locally rather than feeding improvements upstream so that it flows back down and out into RHEL, Fedora, etc as well as just CentOS [I do not, and referred you to Fedora earlier in this thread] 3. Set up a local mirror of SRPMs, not just of the released Enterprise sources of upstream, but its RawHide as well. I do this, and have a daily 'diff' report to scan for new material to review. Start building and testing and filing bugs to make the .spec files more general and less distribution specific, so that cross pollination can occur. You may get rejected (I often am), but I try to improve the breed 4. The same problems repeat time and again in the Forums. Add its RSS feed, and read every new post as it crosses [I do]. Add pointers or content as needed, and 'cc' into updates on the thread [I do]. I have noticed a trend, that lately the three or four regulars are moving content more to the correct tree location, and asking questioners to do their research, and dropping out-links to answers rather than doing so in line. I do this as well when I form an answer, as it provides the linkage hints Google needs to note 'reputation' and to weave answers together. 5. Join the main IRC channel or mailing list, and confirm you can answer every question posed for a solid week; if not, fill in your knowledge gaps with experimentation. At that point, start thoughtfully pointing a person toward the answers. Spoon-feeding is NOT a good thing, and does not gain any points in my eyes, as that is not the stated purpose of the channel. The mailing list is looser as to /on topic/ but when a person repeatedly recommends 'non-CentOS' approaches over acceptable CentOS product, I'll certainly notice ... and that is perhaps not a good thing for further advancement. I _USE_ tinydns some places where it is the right fit, but I don't mention it here 6. Once you have demonstrated skills, ask to be admitted to the next QA effort (we get three of four point update chances a year), and do QA. People who sign up and are admitted often slack off [don't participate in the ML, don't file reports, are not in IRC], and by that inaction demonstrate they are are not interested in progressing further. People _do_ get busy with real life or have to rest from burnout and take time off 7. Once you have demonstrated skills, ask for some special project to build some element of needed infrastructure that is not otherwise getting done, an
Re: [CentOS] CentOS Project Infrastructure
Bob Taylor wrote: > On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 11:54 -0500, Johnny Hughes wrote: >>> Bob Taylor wrote: > > [snip] > >>> Exactly the *wrong* response. I wonder if responses similar to this >>> loses potential users or loses existing customers. Personally, it >>> disgusts me. >> It is not *wrong* ... any more than your response is *wrong*. >> >> Your opinion is for you and my opinion is for me. >> >> And the GREAT thing about open source is, there is always another >> project if you don't like the current one. > > Let me add: As a *developer* you are saying the wrong things. > >> My point is, the CentOS team has put in an unbelievable amount of time >> and effort to build this distribution. We will continue to do so. If >> you like it use it. If you don't like it, don't use it. > > And my point is: Just *who* are you doing this "unbelievable amount of > time and effort.." *for*? Not for you, for people who appreciate it. I have never been paid a dime for any work to the CentOS project. > >> If someone has a major problem with the distro, then they should find >> one that they don't have a major problem with. I don't want hard >> feelings or anyone to be upset, but if we are not meeting your >> expectations then you might be able to find another that does. I do not >> think you will ... but trying is certainly better than being upset. > > It's your *attitude*, Johnny. I'm attempting to help you with your > people skills. OK? It is not helpful nor desirable to talk to people in > such an apparently arrogant manner. If you did so with clients, you most > certainly wouldn't have any in short order and possibly be looking for > another job. > > Enough said. > Let me see. First, I give you a free product that people pay thousands of dollars for. I do so voluntarily. Second, I am supposed to also kiss your ass? What kind of attitude should I have when you come into my organization, take a free product, tell me that everyone working on the project sucks, tell me that they need to work harder and get you the free product faster, tell me that you need to have a say in how the organization works? If you want to use the product, do so. If not, don't. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Re: [CentOS] RPMs for vispan , spamstat, phplistadmin
> Guys, > > i have heard of vispan, phplistadmin, spamstat from the mailscanner manual > and > would like to experiment with them. > > 1. Any thoughts on them? ( i am trying to avoid mailwatch bcos i think vispan > is > better fit for reporting) > 2. I have googled for their centos rpms but no luck? Any ideas where i can > get > their rpms? hv downloaded phplistadmin and tried from source...its pretty messed up...i dont even think it works. any thought on vispan? spamstat? i hv tried looking in rpmforge regards, marco. ___ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
