On Sun, Nov 16, 2003 at 03:26:51PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > Since you're posting that as the DPL you're asking for the following > reply. Sorry :) > > It's been proven plenty of times that whenever we have task depend on a > single person doing it, the lack of redundancy comes back and bites us in > the ass whenever there's the slightest bit of a problem. Why do you think that contributes _anything_ to the discussion? It's not remotely insightful, rather it's trivially obvious. What that means is that Martin already knows it and understands it, and doesn't need to be told. It also means that, if it were easy to add some redundancy, it would already have happened. Which in turn means that it's hard. If you want to help these things, first you have to recognise the _actual_ problems, then see if you can help solve them. Doing the reverse -- thinking of problems you could address, then hoping they exist, like say, imagining Martin doesn't see the benefits in redundancy, and solving that by telling him -- is both unhelpful and distracting. (And, actually it's wrong, it bites us when the person responsible for the job disappears or is busy doing other things -- "the slightest bit of a problem" is usually handled so well you don't even notice. A little less hyperbole would be nice.) Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review! -- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
Attachment:
pgpxTV12LJ0Te.pgp
Description: PGP signature