[lpi-discuss] Re: LPIC-3 core exam

[Bryan J. Smith]

Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> Etienne -- I was wrong about Samba being important.
> ... cut ...

Etienne Goyer <etienne.goyer at outlands.ca> wrote:
> But it is.  The question is : should it be a core exam ?  I
> believe not, for reasons exposed earlier.  If you disagree,
> let's discuss it!

You utterly missed my (quite rhetoric-filled, and I full admit) 2nd
statement right after that ...

Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> Etienne -- I was wrong about Samba being important.
> Alan -- I was wrong about Samba not being important.

In other words, while you two circle each other (amongst others)
barking back and forth on whether or not "Samba is important" or not,
whether it should be a "core" exam or not, I'm trying to *SMACK* both
of you to stop talking in "projects" (like they were "products") and
think in _technologies_!

E.g., SMB is *USELESS* for UNIX-to-UNIX file services.  And SMB works
rather _poorly_ for Linux-to-Linux file services (don't get me
started).  And that's just "network file services" -- _ignoring_ the
real, "enterprise" aspects of authentication, objecdts, etc...

Now, I invite any of you to read my recent posts, the archives and
countless other discussions.  Work with Matt.  He's really a key
leader in this project.  He knows where the "project" name on the
exam ends and the "enterprise" aspects of its questions/content
begin.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith   Professional, Technical Annoyance
b.j.smith at ieee.org    http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------
     Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution