Re: [Gluster-devel] Glusterd: A New Hope

[Jeff Darcy]

On 03/25/2013 12:44 PM, Alex Attarian wrote:
> Adding more complexity means only making it a nightmare for administrators.
> I've said this times and times and I will say it again, your documentation has
> always been bad, out of respect I'm not calling it shit. If you had taken your
> time and grabbed a random admin and watched him set up a system, you would've
> cried for him. Until this day I don't understand why you haven't taken the time
> to sit down and write a good documentation so more people can use gluster.
> Instead what happens is people come look at the site, look at the docs and
> examples, and run away.

Look, I'm not here to solve a documentation problem.  I've done more than any 
other developer on that front already.  I'm also not here to explain the 
difference between the GlusterFS community project and the Red Hat Storage 
product, or enumerate the features that *people have demanded* which make the 
project more complex.  Wrong forum, wrong time, maybe wrong guy.  I'm trying to 
solve a specific set of technical problems in a component that most of our 
users appreciate.  Being able to form a cluster and export a volume with three 
commands from one CLI (probe, create, start) is not something we're going to 
throw away.  People who want to build its equivalent themselves are a tiny 
minority insufficient to sustain the project.

If you disagree with the very idea of having glusterd, then *we have nothing to 
talk about*.  If you appreciate the infrastructure it provides, if you want to 
make that infrastructure as robust and scalable and convenient to use as 
possible, then by all means share your ideas or opinions on ideas that have 
already been presented.  The other users who have participated constructively 
don't deserve to be crowded out of the conversation