ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Changing some verbiage in XOCE

    IT Discussion
    open source xen orchestra community discussion
    5
    29
    2.2k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • DanpD
      Danp @DustinB3403
      last edited by

      @DustinB3403 Technically, you haven't installed it when you modify the source. You've copied the source to the local machine.

      JaredBuschJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • JaredBuschJ
        JaredBusch @Danp
        last edited by

        @Danp said in Changing some verbiage in XOCE:

        @DustinB3403 Technically, you haven't installed it when you modify the source. You've copied the source to the local machine.

        If this is correct, then you basically are forking it.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • scottalanmillerS
          scottalanmiller
          last edited by

          Configuring is not forking. It's still the original being installed. And don't use any term like "install from source". The source and the install are the same thing, installing from source means something very specific that last I knew, cannot be applied here. There is no source and binary. All of XO is source at all times.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • DustinB3403D
            DustinB3403
            last edited by DustinB3403

            My reply is in response to a post on my GH account regarding the same topic.

            While I agree that changing some of the verbiage here via this install script would at least be a means of evidence, the goal isn't to prove or disprove what the vatesfr team is stating but to hopefully get people to understand where and what level of support is had with "building from source."

            It's a bit of a battle, because and I feel very strongly that at least Olivier doesn't want to support at all the source installation method and as such should simply instruct his team to not offer support if someone doesn't have a contract with them.

            So while making these changes makes sense from a community standpoint, the problem lies with the Vatesfr business and not the software or verbiage as it exists and is portrayed.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • DustinB3403D
              DustinB3403
              last edited by

              Which to that point, then means, maybe we should just submit a PR for changing the verbiage from "No Support" to something more communal and less off putting.

              But even with those changes, I doubt that the underlying issue would get resolved without something more drastic, like changing the "Bug Tracker" link to point first to the individual's GH accounts who've create install scripts.

              DustinB3403D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • DustinB3403D
                DustinB3403 @DustinB3403
                last edited by

                @DustinB3403 said in Changing some verbiage in XOCE:

                But even with those changes, I doubt that the underlying issue would get resolved without something more drastic, like changing the "Bug Tracker" link to point first to the individual's GH accounts who've create install scripts.

                Which, would be up to the script author and team to ensure that the content is updated to point to the correct location. As certainly the Vatesfr team has no way to submit that change short of submitting PRs to each of the most highly used scripts with those changes.

                And those PRs could still be decline/ignored etc.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • DustinB3403D
                  DustinB3403
                  last edited by

                  It looks as though the upstream team is making some meaningful verbiage changes as well.

                  Which hopefully will help to address the issues.

                  1 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • 1
                    1337 @DustinB3403
                    last edited by

                    @DustinB3403 said in Changing some verbiage in XOCE:

                    It looks as though the upstream team is making some meaningful verbiage changes as well.

                    Which hopefully will help to address the issues.

                    Looks good.
                    Just get them to change spelling from recieve to receive too. :thumbs_up:
                    https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/pull/4186/files/3809f4fb2f1160c0fffca95b4e6777a79201607c

                    DustinB3403D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • DustinB3403D
                      DustinB3403 @1337
                      last edited by

                      @Pete-S said in Changing some verbiage in XOCE:

                      @DustinB3403 said in Changing some verbiage in XOCE:

                      It looks as though the upstream team is making some meaningful verbiage changes as well.

                      Which hopefully will help to address the issues.

                      Looks good.
                      Just get them to change spelling from recieve to receive too. :thumbs_up:
                      https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/pull/4186/files/3809f4fb2f1160c0fffca95b4e6777a79201607c

                      I submitted a PR to the same document as the verbiage is still rough around the edges and doesn't really lay out the issue.

                      See here

                      1 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • 1
                        1337 @DustinB3403
                        last edited by

                        @DustinB3403 said in Changing some verbiage in XOCE:

                        @Pete-S said in Changing some verbiage in XOCE:

                        @DustinB3403 said in Changing some verbiage in XOCE:

                        It looks as though the upstream team is making some meaningful verbiage changes as well.

                        Which hopefully will help to address the issues.

                        Looks good.
                        Just get them to change spelling from recieve to receive too. :thumbs_up:
                        https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/pull/4186/files/3809f4fb2f1160c0fffca95b4e6777a79201607c

                        I submitted a PR to the same document as the verbiage is still rough around the edges and doesn't really lay out the issue.

                        See here

                        Hmm, your changes looks good but English is not their first language so I doubt they can appreciate it.

                        DustinB3403D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • DustinB3403D
                          DustinB3403 @1337
                          last edited by

                          @Pete-S said in Changing some verbiage in XOCE:

                          Hmm, your changes looks good but English is not their first language so I doubt they can appreciate it.

                          He's arguing about me calling their team "talented people", so you'd rather the PR say "developed by a bunch of uppity french people" ??

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • DustinB3403D
                            DustinB3403
                            last edited by

                            And arguing about the word "critical".

                            Specifically

                            "Critical" means everything outside "critical" is OK from the sources. So it's like "critical" is even more a niche than "any" production usage. That's why I think this wording is not fit: every production load (ie in a company) makes sense. Hobbyist is clearly not related to "production", that's why "critical" word isn't needed here
                            

                            Critical in the business sense, means I need support, supporting it yourself is not an option.

                            FFS

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • 1
                            • 2
                            • 2 / 2
                            • First post
                              Last post