CentOS docs - Jun 2015 - Update for FAQ - q.15 & q.31 update & merge

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 06/05/2015 01:52 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
> On 06/05/2015 08:30 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> Folks:
>> 
>> A few of us (KB, Johnny, myself) have begun work on updating the
>> main FAQs on the CentOS wiki. Mainly that means looking over and
>> updating for any changes that have been going on in the last 18
>> months as the project has expanded to include SIG releases,
>> monthly updates of many new types, new hardware architectures,
>> and so forth.
>> 
>> For this first update we've got this from the FAQ:
>> 
>> q.15: 
>> http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General#head-6e2c3746ec45ac314291746676032
1e8
>>
>> 
68f43c0e
>> q.31 
>> http://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/General#head-dcca41e9a3d5ac4c6d900a991990f
d11
>>
>> 
930867d6
>> 
>> The first item is that these questions are repetitive, so I'd
>> like to combine them in to a single answer. Second is that
>> version numbering has expanded, so we need to cover monthly
>> updates and so forth.
>> 
>> Circling around on this, we ended up with the following complete 
>> rewrite that would replace q.31 and retire q.15 (thereby making
>> q.31 in to q.30.) How does this update sound?
>> 
>> If we're close enough, I'll push it to live at the start of
next
>> week, and we can always continue iterating on it.
>> 
>> The text below is in Moin Moin format; I was going to do a diff 
>> between the versions but then we differed so wildly in combining
>> and rewriting that I think a mental diff will work better. A
>> formatted draft is here:
>> 
>> http://wiki.centos.org/KarstenWade/GeneralFAQUpdateq31q15
>> 
>> Thanks - Karsten
> 
> I'd say that at least the following paragraphs from q15 are worth 
> preserving: - Any point release is just a "snapshot" with
previous
> updates, plus the latest batch of new upstream updates, rolled into
> a new [base] repo with an initially empty [updates] repo. - There
> is a CentOS Vault containing older CentOS trees. This vault is a 
> picture of the older tree when it was removed from the main tree,
> and does not receive updates. It should only be used for
> reference.
> 
> After " If you are using an older minor version than the latest in
> a given branch, then you are missing security and bugfix updates."
> I'd also emphasize that we offer no support for these
> configurations, something along: For this reason old minor releases
> are never supported. If you want/need to "freeze" at an old point
> release you are entirely on your own.
> 
> 
> wolfy, tired of people who fail to understand what minor releases
> are and keep pushing in IRC for support of old[er] stuff
I think those look pretty good especially if you think they can answer
confusion about community support for older minor versions. Included
here with some highlighting:

The size of this answer article is just a bit larger (looking) than
each of the previous two answers, which is good -- too many words
won't help. :)

I trimmed a bit more stuff -- repetitive phrasing and unrelated terms
- -- I think it's ready publish to the FAQ.

Regards,
- - Karsten
- -- 
Karsten 'quaid' Wade        .^\          CentOS Doer of Stuff
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org    \  http://community.redhat.com
@quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC)  \v'             gpg: AD0E0C41
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlV2FswACgkQ2ZIOBq0ODEFswwCfToKp4r7eNXQvhmauG6n5qSTW
uHUAniYb4hIp9br7JvEnpRNvPAcl/S00
=IviX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On 06/09/2015 01:27 AM, Karsten Wade wrote:
> [...]
> http://wiki.centos.org/KarstenWade/GeneralFAQUpdateq31q15
>
> Thanks - Karsten
>> I'd say that at least the following paragraphs from q15 are worth
>> preserving: - Any point release is just a "snapshot" with
previous
>> updates, plus the latest batch of new upstream updates, rolled into
>> a new [base] repo with an initially empty [updates] repo. - There
>> is a CentOS Vault containing older CentOS trees. This vault is a
>> picture of the older tree when it was removed from the main tree,
>> and does not receive updates. It should only be used for
>> reference.
>>
>> After " If you are using an older minor version than the latest in
>> a given branch, then you are missing security and bugfix updates."
>> I'd also emphasize that we offer no support for these
>> configurations, something along: For this reason old minor releases
>> are never supported. If you want/need to "freeze" at an old
point
>> release you are entirely on your own.
>>
>>
>> wolfy, tired of people who fail to understand what minor releases
>> are and keep pushing in IRC for support of old[er] stuff
> I think those look pretty good especially if you think they can answer
> confusion about community support for older minor versions. Included
> here with some highlighting:
>
> The size of this answer article is just a bit larger (looking) than
> each of the previous two answers, which is good -- too many words
> won't help. :)
>
> I trimmed a bit more stuff -- repetitive phrasing and unrelated terms
> - -- I think it's ready publish to the FAQ.
Call me picky but I'd rephrase
      The CentOS Project *ONLY* provides updates or other changes for 
the latest version of each major branch.
to
      The CentOS Project provides updates or other changes*ONLY* for the 
latest version of each major branch.

I am not a native English speaker so I might be wrong but I feel like 
the emphasis is better placed in the variant I suggested because it 
marks one of the major differences towards RH and the EUS/AUS mechanism 
that exists for RHEL. Heck, we might even add a reference to those a la 
"if you need active support for an older minor release please consider 
using .... "


And yes, this FAQ item becomes a bit longish...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/attachments/20150609/ff1ac02c/attachment-0002.html>

On 9 June 2015 at 07:55, Manuel Wolfshant <wolfy at nobugconsulting.ro>
wrote:
>
<significant snippage>
>
> Call me picky but I'd rephrase
>      The CentOS Project ONLY provides updates or other changes for the
> latest version of each major branch.
> to
>      The CentOS Project provides updates or other changes ONLY for the
> latest version of each major branch.
The latter is preferable to the former (says a native Englishman).

Alan.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 06/08/2015 11:55 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
> Call me picky but I'd rephrase The CentOS Project *ONLY* provides
> updates or other changes for the latest version of each major
> branch. to The CentOS Project provides updates or other
> changes*ONLY* for the latest version of each major branch.
Sorry, reading thread backwards so I replied to Alan, and I agree,
thanks for the catch.
> I am not a native English speaker so I might be wrong but I feel
> like the emphasis is better placed in the variant I suggested
> because it marks one of the major differences towards RH and the
> EUS/AUS mechanism that exists for RHEL. Heck, we might even add a
> reference to those a la "if you need active support for an older
> minor release please consider using .... "
Well, *I* might not suggest putting that in :) but I won't disagree
with the idea. ;D
> And yes, this FAQ item becomes a bit longish...
We're pretty close to each of the previous, so overall we've cut the
size by at least 40%. :)

- - Karsten
- -- 
Karsten 'quaid' Wade        .^\          CentOS Doer of Stuff
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org    \  http://community.redhat.com
@quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC)  \v'             gpg: AD0E0C41
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlV3PaAACgkQ2ZIOBq0ODEGStQCdG9I3vcrAbRx+puYzlO3p7SkM
Af8AoODVDs+7QqyglI1GHhQ5jqGUxRky
=LNgO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----