Re: Why does Ubuntu have all the ideas?
On Saturday 29 July 2006 21:00, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 19:27:57 +0300, George Danchev <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> > On Saturday 29 July 2006 18:51, Manoj Srivastava wrote: -cut--
> >> It could go either way, of course, but I was referring to the
> >> difference between due diligence of a group, as opposed to an
> >> individual; potentially, a team is only as strong as the weakest
> >> link.
> > `weakest link' is not always the case for each package release. It
> > might happens that only `strongest links' has been involved in a
> > package release also.
> I am not sure I understand what that last sentence means.
I'm arguing that yours "a team is only as strong as the weakest link" is
similar to the conclusion of "an individual is only as strong as its worst
characteristic". See the deadlock ?
> > Furthermore, a single maintainer could also has a `bad day' and
> > produce a bad package release. So, I don't believe there is unified
> > formula to measure how much a team is being strong, it all boils
> > down to have a good communication inside the group. You will hadly
> > have a good rollover with a single maintainer..., well except NMUers
> > and Hijackers.
> I am not sure you have made the thesis that a team is always
> to be preferred, to the point of foisting teams on people by force.
I doubt there are people who believe in any ultimate decision wrt team
maintenance and forcing that on others, at least no normative doc says that.
It it merely like if people think they can benefit from a team-based
maintenace then they assemble a team. Yes, you have good and bad teams, good
and bad individuals, and any other combinations thereof.
pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB 2003-03-18 <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
fingerprint 1AE7 7C66 0A26 5BFF DF22 5D55 1C57 0C89 0E4B D0AB