Ian's critrics on my former reply (was: top posting, HTML posting and "the closer")

[Alexander Dalloz]

Am Mi, den 30.03.2005 schrieb Ian McKinnon um 20:20:

>    I was quite surprised when I got the email from Alexander that was
> hostile, challenging my expertise at linux without giving me the benefit of
> the doubt that I might have some inkling of what I was doing and did not
> need to explain my whole IT strategy to him. At least he did not challenge
> my manhood also.  Then to see the whole string of posts to follow about top
> posting, bottom posting and the rants of David Curry chasing people off the
> list.

> Ian E. McKinnon

Ian,

I must say to be astonished that you react that sensitive on my
legitimate critics and secondly on my questions whether you knew what
your self described intention was. Do you there have a tender spot?
Let me sum it up again: you asked about the possibility to upgrade a
server - attention: you said server yourself, not me - from current
stable release to Fedora Core 4 test 1 release and then to let it run
months, after which you then want to pain free upgrade to Fedora Core 4
stable.
I not only told you, that you hijacking a thread is something "bad"
because it mixes threads, but I too tried to answer your question with
hints to the difficulty of your plan. I did not only criticise the form
of your posting because you hijacked twice but too because you even
quoted the completely unrelated list mail along with your question.
Thinking about the daily volume of this mailing list, I think it is fair
to point you to that facts.
Finally, if _you_ are asking about upgrading a _server_ system to a
first test release I think it is legitimate to ask whether you know what
you are intending and what background you have (well, not in the sense
of a resume). My reply wasn't hostile in that sense! There are enough
users around who think it is worth to run the latest, greatest release
and applications number they can get, not facing the fact that "test
releases eat babies" (usual phrase to sum up a serious warning). So I
wanted to find out, whether you are one of that kind. While private
desktop users don't have very serious problem if they make their system
unusable by trying an upgrade to a test release, in business
environments running servers (again: you spoke about a server) such a
damage costs time and money. And the other think I explained you is the
circumstance, that there is no in any way supported or guaranteed
upgrade path from any test release to the final stable release (which I
think you hand in mind when you said "FC4 goes gold").

Alexander

"If you can't stand the heat, go out of the kitchen."


-- 
Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG http://pgp.mit.edu 0xB366A773
legal statement: http://www.uni-x.org/legal.html
Fedora Core 2 GNU/Linux on Athlon with kernel 2.6.10-1.771_FC2smp 
Serendipity 20:42:39 up 18:09, 18 users, 0.36, 0.44, 0.48 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20050330/7c390718/attachment-0001.sig>