Re: Description of tasks
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:20:08AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Au contraire. Look at what happened in release management --
> people were inducted as journeymen rm's, and learned hands on. No
> document is ever likely to be as comprehensive. Instead of
> burdening people who do the work with the task of spoon feeding
> people, let the people interested in the roles put in some effort.
And, in fact, the people who were inducted as journeymen RMs that way
were people who'd already put in some degree of effort themselves to
learning how things worked from reading the systems that were there
already and applying common sense, perhaps asking the odd question when
they got stuck. I know I'd been mailing aj every so often with suggested
tweaks for testing since shortly after it was implemented.
I don't believe I've ever had a Debian position where there was a
ready-made job description, a complete description of everything I had
to do, and a manual describing all the regular problems that occurred.
Frankly, if there had been, I'd have considered it boring, and almost
certainly wouldn't have put in the effort to figure out *properly* how
it was really supposed to work. People who don't truly understand their
roles aren't going to be very good at coming up with creative new ways
to solve them (e.g. devotee, katie, testing).
--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
Reply to: