[rhelv6-list] [rhelv6-beta-list] RHEL7 mailing list

Tue Apr 22 13:41:56 UTC 2014

Hi all,

I know the 'me too' posting is generally frowned upon on most mailing lists,
but I think this time I will make an exception and hope people will
forgive me. Like many on this list, I too think that a mailing list
is MUCH more useful than a forum, or, heaven forbid, a facebook group. ;)

Cheers,

	Horst

"Brian Long (brilong)" <brilong at cisco.com> wrote:

> I concur.  What if we set up a rhelv7-list at anotherdomain.com<mailto:rhelv7-list at anotherdomain.com>?  I?m thinking Red Hat might get the hint if a bunch of us subscribe to this list and start discussing the new release.  :)
>
> /Brian/
> --
>        Brian Long                             |       |
>        Research Triangle Park, NC         . | | | . | | | .
>                                               '       '
>                                               C I S C O
>
> On Apr 22, 2014, at 8:55 AM, francis picabia <fpicabia at gmail.com<mailto:fpicabia at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> My response on this topic is an observation for which I think many of you
> can concur.
> Mailing lists include informed replies, and are usually answered.
> Forums tend to include misinformed responses, silly solutions
> like "I installed Gentoo and the problem went away", and postings with no
> replies.
> My all time favourite is the posting with the exact problem you've seen and
> the
> OP simply posts: "never mind, the problem is resolved".
>
> For example, if I google a problem and a link for a match is pointing to
> Ubuntu forums,
> I don't even bother looking at it - the quality is so low, and so many
> postings are unresolved.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 11:56 AM, solarflow99 <solarflow99 at gmail.com<mailto:solarflow99 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I think a separate list for EL7 may not really be necessary, but I sure
> hope mailing lists will continue, I'd really hate to see that go.
>
> When I look at forums, there's a lot of activity in Fedora, I guess the
> younger generation prefers not using email as much?   :)
> The ML's have always been more of a keeping in touch with things for me,
> rather than a than a tool to search for bugs/solutions
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Bryan J Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org<mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org>> wrote:
>
> I do not speak for anyone but m myself, a 20 year Linux Professional
> involved with many projects.
>
> All I stated is that capture and reuse works very well via other avenues.
> Mailing lists get more limiting, and consistently revisit issues, at
> 10-25K+ users. Sun and Linux Managers mitigate this with a reply
> off-list/Summary on-list approach.
>
> Although I did find it humorous when at least two individuals stated they
> did not care for Bugzilla. Kinda made my point for me. ;)
> On Apr 18, 2014 11:34 AM, "R P Herrold" <herrold at owlriver.com<mailto:herrold at owlriver.com>> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2014, Eugene Vilensky wrote:
>
> Forgive me for not reading the entirety of last-year's discussion on
> the issue, but is it fair statement at this point that Red Hat, Inc.
> won't be hosting a new mailing list for RHEL7 specific discussion?
>
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo
>
> The 'trailhead' for that discussion was over here:
>
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv6-beta-list/2013-December/thread.html
>
> and I came away with the conclusion that at Least Bryan J
> Smith (for whom I have great respect in some matters) who is
> at Red Hat) was strongly advocating for a migration to other
> support venue
>
> Problem as I see it is that some such venue do ,and some do
> not leave 'breadcrumbs' that others can follow and read, and
> major search engines find hidden nuggets in.  The thread
> petered out, and as you remark, no list for '7' (assuming for
> the sake of argument that which will be its name) has appeared
>
> Also the Red Hat acquisition and rework of the formerly
> independent CentOS communication venue seems substantially
> complete.  A later post also cites dissappointment as to
> information density
>
> No big deal.  I would rather light a candle than curse the
> darkness.  This will be my only post here on this matter
>
> Please feel free to join the mailing list at:
>        http://lists.clefos.org/mailman/listinfo/enterpriseseven-list
> if you are interested in the approach of an independent
> mailing list on the next major enterprise OS product (binary
> and 'from sources' rebuilds) from our host.  I would hope to
> run it with civility and to stay close on topic.  As need
> admits, additional lists are of course possible, but by and
> large, I hope that the RHEL and CentOS mailing lists venues
> will suffice for the next major release
>
> - -- Russ herrold
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlNRb/UACgkQMRh1QZtklkSW5QCfZtVVgn84xOtcpa2+gnScQere
> MUkAn3f3sXo3pb+SOCWBjafYxNeJOeki
> =/H4O
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> rhelv6-beta-list mailing list
> rhelv6-beta-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-beta-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rhelv6-list mailing list
> rhelv6-list at redhat.com<mailto:rhelv6-list at redhat.com>
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rhelv6-list mailing list
> rhelv6-list at redhat.com<mailto:rhelv6-list at redhat.com>
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> rhelv6-list mailing list
> rhelv6-list at redhat.com<mailto:rhelv6-list at redhat.com>
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv6-list
>