On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 7:05 PM, PatrickD Garvey <patrickdgarveyt at
gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Brian Stinson <bstinson at ksu.edu>
wrote:
>
>> On Dec 23 17:05, PatrickD Garvey wrote:
>> > Thank you for your contribution to the discussion. I'm glad
you appear
>> to
>> > understand this was not directed at you personally.
>>
>> Certainly no offense was taken here. I'm thankful for people like
you
>> who are looking out for understandability.
>>
>> >
>> > I'm a retired System Administrator. Part of my job was being a
>> professional
>> > paranoid about user credentials. At most of the companies where I
>> worked,
>> > loss or sharing of the company phone book was a firing offense. I
>> imagine
>> > that is the source of our difference of opinion.
>>
>> With my documentation writer hat on, I can say that I wrote my page
that
>> way out of convenience (rather hastily I might add :) and in the
absence
>> of official style guidelines it was easiest to copy directly from the
>> screen. Perhaps we can adopt some of the guidelines suggested
downthread
>> by Karsten that will make things more clear. In the meantime I'll
work
>> on generalizing the centpkg page.
>>
>> --Brian
>>
>
> Excellent! Thank you.
>
> One page at a time is as fast as we can work.
>
That's interesting. It appears this exchange is having trouble reaching the
centos-docs archive even though
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/2014-December/005463.html has
been archived. I wonder what could have happened.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/attachments/20141224/6e1fbb82/attachment-0002.html>