Most active commenters
  • bauruine(5)
  • freedomben(3)

←back to thread

Red Hat Technical Writing Style Guide

(stylepedia.net)
265 points jumpocelot | 14 comments | 10 Jul 25 15:01 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
ban2ly ◴[10 Jul 25 17:12 UTC] No.44523176[source]▶
Seems useless, as Red Hat does not write documentation
replies(1): >>44523221 #
curt15 ◴[10 Jul 25 17:17 UTC] No.44523221[source]▶
Red Hat has some of the most professional documentation of any distro. E.g https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_enterprise_...
replies(2): >>44523685 #>>44524291 #
1. bauruine ◴[10 Jul 25 17:56 UTC] No.44523685[source]▶
Much of it is behind a paywall though. I manage more than a hundred licenced RHEL machines, was an RHCSA and RHCE with a company mail but I'd have to ask someone in my org to give me access. I just blocked access.redhat.com on kagi. F you.
replies(2): >>44523875 #>>44523996 #
2. worthless-trash ◴[10 Jul 25 18:12 UTC] No.44523875[source]▶
Most of the 'docs' are not behind the paywall, you're mixing up the KCS / FAQ's.

The docs are on https://docs.redhat.com/

replies(1): >>44524094 #
3. SSLy ◴[10 Jul 25 18:24 UTC] No.44523996[source]▶
> paywall

at worst a regwall.

replies(1): >>44524097 #
4. bauruine ◴[10 Jul 25 18:35 UTC] No.44524094[source]▶
I didn't mix it up but most of the time I stumble upon redhat.com it's KCS (access.redhat.com) articles. Yes it's not "documentation" but if it's worth to create an article because that many people have the same issue I'd say you could add it to your documentation as known issues.
replies(1): >>44528662 #
5. bauruine ◴[10 Jul 25 18:36 UTC] No.44524097[source]▶
"You need an active subscription" is paywall for me.
replies(3): >>44524304 #>>44525087 #>>44528655 #
6. freedomben ◴[10 Jul 25 18:58 UTC] No.44524304{3}[source]▶
You manage over a hundred licensed RHEL machines but don't have an active subscription to access.redhat.com? Somebody is doing something terribly wrong in your org. How do you open support cases without that, or even manage the subs?

For the record I think Red Hat shouldn't put those behind a login, but that's a different argument

replies(1): >>44524625 #
7. bauruine ◴[10 Jul 25 19:28 UTC] No.44524625{4}[source]▶
I could ask for access I assume it's just a mail but I don't want to bother them because I can find a solution one or two results down from the redhat site anyway. I've worked with Linux and without a support contract for long enough that I know how debug and fix things. I wouldn't get direct access to support cases anyway. Our Linux guys provide a bash script to auto enroll.

It's not a login. It's a login with an active subscription. Are those article that valuable that they can't provide it for everyone with a @company.com address that has >n licences?

replies(1): >>44524699 #
8. freedomben ◴[10 Jul 25 19:34 UTC] No.44524699{5}[source]▶
Fair, I forgot they changed it to require an active sub rather than just an account. That was a bad move IMHO. And yes I fully agree they should at a minimun automatically allow access to everyone with @company.com with >n licenses.

Pure speculation, but I'm guessing they view the knowledge base as part of "support" (or like level 1 or something), which is why they're so restrictive. I think they greatly underestimate the number of people like us though that already use RHEL but don't want to bother with accounts because we can get by without it, but would benefit from having the access. They don't seem to understand the friction their policies create, and I think that's deeply unfortunate.

replies(1): >>44525129 #
9. SSLy ◴[10 Jul 25 20:19 UTC] No.44525087{3}[source]▶
you can grab a free dev sub and it unlocks the KB and quick fixes too. Unless that changed relatively recently.
10. jwildeboer ◴[10 Jul 25 20:23 UTC] No.44525129{6}[source]▶
(I’m a red hatter) anyone can get the Red Hat Developer subscription for free and get full access to the knowledge base.
replies(2): >>44525140 #>>44525248 #
11. freedomben ◴[10 Jul 25 20:24 UTC] No.44525140{7}[source]▶
Thank you for the clarification! That's what I thought, but then I found a bunch of comments indicating they had changed it. Glad to hear it's still free
12. bauruine ◴[10 Jul 25 20:33 UTC] No.44525248{7}[source]▶
Thanks. Maybe I'll do it the next time. That seems like less friction than having to write our representative / admim however you call the people that could add me to our subscription. But why do you put it behind that if it's free anyway?
13. ◴[11 Jul 25 05:27 UTC] No.44528655{3}[source]▶
14. worthless-trash ◴[11 Jul 25 05:28 UTC] No.44528662{3}[source]▶
I dont think that google is indexing that without a login/subscription though. TIL.