Re: iMX6 EOMA-68 CPU Card (or rather arguing over what a boot loader should do)

[Bill Gatliff <bgat@billgatliff.com>]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Lennart Sorensen
<lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
> I think the big difference is:  Some of us design it to not go wrong.
> Some of us design it to make it easy to fix when something goes wrong.
> Different philosophy.

With all due respect, I'll just say this: it WILL go wrong.  There is
no point designing for a universe where things will not go wrong,
because that universe simply does not exist.

So if your plan does not include an accommodation for that, your
system is fundamentally incomplete.  End of story.

> To some users, something going wrong really isn't appreaciated and it
> should really be designed to avoid that.  Simply reloading the box
> isn't good enough.

Again, in the real world things simply go wrong: hardware failures,
buggy code, unstable power supplies, butterflies, and so on.  You must
be prepared to deal with them.

Users are far more accepting of the inevitable failure when they also
see that you have planned for it and already have a recovery strategy
in place.

That's professionalism.


b.g.
-- 
Bill Gatliff
bgat@billgatliff.com