Re: no support w/2.5 kernel installed. Spelling, no big deal 4 me

> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 13:23:16 -0500
> From: Audioslave - 7M3 - Live <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: no support w/2.5 kernel installed. Spelling, no big deal 4 me
> Reply-To: [email protected]
> 
> Jarod Wilson wrote:
> I usually abrieviate thev word as misc. It doesn't follow any convention 
>   for spelling that I heard of. Is this word perhaps non-english, where 
> it would follow that language's rules and regs 4 spelling.

English (especially US English) is quite the mutt language.

> > Miscellaneous. Sorry, spelling is one of my pet peeves. :) I just prefer
> > to see people spell things correctly, because in my mind, mis-spellings
> > detract from the respect people have for what you say (er, write).
> > 
> 
> I try to spell things correctly. What spelling does for me is very 
> little. I take it that those that do not finite their spelling to a 
> conformity standard are more genuine and are less likely to be clones 
> from a tribe.

Ya got me. I'm a clone.

> A completely conformity spelled document usually conveys deceptiveness 
> and conformity for a person. Deception, because most likely, they need 
> the aid of a spell checker. Conformity, because it sounds like a "Felix 
> Ungar" for the language community.

I still think a document in which everything is properly spelled conveys
that the author has a very good grasp on the language, not deception.
And 99.999% of the time, I don't need a spell-checker (those miss
grammatical errors, and like-sounding word substitutions, so you can't
rely on them anyway). :)

Some of it isn't even a matter of spelling. Some people just aren't that
handy with the keyboard. To this day, I still believe keyboarding was
the best class I ever took in high school.

> > Exactly. But note that Red Hat won't provide any support whatsoever for
> > a machine with something other than an officially released Red Hat
> > kernel, for obvious reasons.
> > 
> 
> I understand the conformity rational regarding support. If it ain't in 
> the supported "dictionary" for rules and regulations. It isn't in whole 
> a "spellchecked" problem.
> 
> I think that it is a policy that both adds core to the product and also 
> severely inhibits more rapid advancements for the distribution.

A large part of it is a business decision. Maintaining a tech support
staff isn't cheap, and the job becomes much harder if you don't limit
support to stable products.

> I feel that if you expect to make a profit from Linux. You will have to 
> abandon the concept of all the ducks in a row. For paying customers, 
> they are both real and hardly regard limitations on paid for options as 
> an acceptable situation.

I disagree. The biggest profits are in the corporate arena. Corporate
customers want stable products (and yet some still use Windows, so maybe
unstable kernels would be okay?!?).

> >>For my situation, with computer systems, that are used at work.  There is no usage
> >>of linux, for the most part.  I think that odd numbered releases should be odd
> >>numbered and follow the developmental phases of the kernel. Of course, this idea
> >>goes to the "added effort" and little added benefits that adding the bp-sec or
> >>bp-broken-opt  wiuld convey to an average person, that would be aided with the
> >>visual que. Though, I agree with the ending argument that you cannot save the
> >>world. Though, it is pretty entertaining to do so.
> > 
> > 
> > I whole-heartedly disagree with your idea that odd-numbered OS releases
> > ought to be development versions. That is what betas are for. Do you
> > know of any other company putting out an operating system in that
> > manner?
> > 
> 
> Betas are made to take the alpha factor out of the equation. Running 
> official developmental releases is a concept that I favor. This beta 
> cycle went through three phases. Get to phase 1, then you are stagnant 
> until phase 2. Run phase 2 for awhile, then you are stagnated at phase 3.

Um, I think the main difference between a beta release and a development
release is, for the most part, the name. And you aren't stagnant.
There's Rawhide and up2date.

> This is my first beta release that I also interacted within a mailing 
> group. I have learned a lot from the time that I have spent on the list 
> and beta.
>
> I appreciate the wide range of intellects that are also participating on 
> the beta. I learned more about Red Hat, than solo on my 4.2 to present 
> cowboying probably achieved.

Cowboying is good, too. But you definitely can pick up a lot just by
participating in these lists.

-- 
Jarod Wilson, RHCE
<[email protected]>
"A wise man once said nothing at all"
--



-- 
Phoebe-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list