[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: This was posted on Digg.com -- Linux Distribution blog/article
On Sat, 2005-12-10 at 20:34 -0500, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> You seem to think that this job is somehow split into two groups, as if
> you're exempt from the kinds of things Red Hat has to do.
Stop! Please point out where I said I was an exception to regression
and integration testing?! Really! I am an engineer who is called
"anal" to my face when I push the hard lines on the software engineering
cycle. When I rip people a new one when they don't commit their changes
to /etc to revision control. When people roll things out without
I merely said that I do not have to test for installer issues, hardware
issues, running desktop applications, other applications, etc... that
Red Hat does, and spends a lot of time doing! Certifying! Etc... You
have brought up this point over and over and I'm trying to tell you I'm
_not_ doing such.
> And what I'm trying to tell you is that you're throwing away a lot of
> good work when you insist that you have to build everything,
> work Red Hat has done and that you should do too,
For the last freak'n time, I _rarely_ use Gentoo. I use Debian, Fedora
or RHEL 50:1 over Gentoo or BSD. I understand that value, so stop
But I am *NOT* putting a Debian distro into a 64MB flash!
And I am *NOT* going to load up all sorts of scripts and support crap
when I'm putting up a heavily customized Internet server that is bare-
boned, lean and specifically configured. Something that goes on a self-
certified piece of hardware with those specific, self "tested and
approved" roll-outs of software.
Yes, 75-80% of people providing such solutions from source code don't
know the first thing about software engineering. And I'd even argue 99%
don't "get it right."
I'm sorry, I'm not one of them! Writing mission critical financial and
defense applications will tend to make you anal on that!
> but can't because you don't have Intel and HP and Dell sending you free
> computers to test your little distro on.
This is _exactly_ where you are so _not_ listening to me!
I do *NOT* need to test on Intel and HP and Dell. They will *NEVER* go
on them! You continually refuse to accept that I am _not_ providing the
same services as you. You keep thinking I'm "redistributing" some sort
of software that users see.
I have to test *ONLY* on the system I've rolled out, as they are the
*ONLY* systems I will be putting *AND* supporting them on! Be it a Tyan
S2885/2895 (dual-Opteron) or a Boser HS-2606 (ViA CLE266/1.2GHz C3 SBC).
Now stop! I am _not_ giving customers a distro, I am installing an
image on a "black box" or "serviced" system. That system *I* provide
the hardware and service of that hardware for!
Specific hardware configuration with a specific bill-of-materials I'm
ensuring I can get the part for 2-3 years, and I am buying that _exact_
-- over and over. And if *1* part changes, I make a "Materials
Review" (MR) to ensure that the entire test process just for the
hardware is addressed! I am _not_ installing to more than *1* hardware
product. Because I am certifying my hardware configuration with the
firmware/software I create!
Now do you understand where I'm coming from?
Or do you continue to label what I'm doing as a "distribution"?!?!?!
> [shrug] Maybe you should consider that you're talking to someone who
> may be just as experienced, or even more so.
But I'm not assuming what you are and aren't capable of.
You have continually asserted many things with regards to *ME*.
I have _avoided_ doing such with you, and the only time I point things
out about yourself is _after_ you make a viewpoint and assert things,
and I'm trying to say I'm not talking about that!
> More to the point, I make my living cleaning up messes created by people
> who think they can fully test a distro all by themselves.
Then *STOP* taking that attitude out on me! Damn that's the problem
right there! Dude, I'm in the same boat with regards to _others_. Just
know, I'm not one of them!
I have installed too many financial and defense systems at Fortune 100
companies to really tolerate this type of "you don't know" crap. I'm
not talking web servers -- I'm talking production desktop and servers
back in the mid-'90s! Back when people thought Linux was a web or print
server and little else!
> But really, all this is just posturing. What matters is what we know,
> and how well we know it.
Then *STOP* telling me what I am and am not capable of based on
> I think I know the distro market, but who knows?
I will _not_ assert what you do or don't know.
So please do _not_ do the same of me!
> But if you're not interested in having your knowledge questioned, then
> oh well. I suppose I wasted my time.
No, I have a real problem with someone asserting what I know and what
I'm capable of -- from a standpoint you have continually proven to be
_different_ than what I'm talking about.
Again, please refer back to the need for Intel, HP, Dell, etc... to send
me systems! Why the heck do I need to test on them if I will _never_
put my run-time images on them?!?!?!
That's why you don't have the faintest idea where I'm coming from. To
you, there is no market for such things. If anything, I don't think you
have ever worked in an environment where you develop software for a
_specific_ piece of hardware, and there is an entire BOM relationship to
I mean, at NASA, we didn't just say ... "oh, well, part X isn't
available, but we've built our software to run on any type like part X."
The _entire_ certification of the software release is built on the
_exact_ BOM! Right down to the part number, firmware and the tiniest of
Bryan J. Smith mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Some things (or athletes) money can't buy.
For everything else there's "ManningCard."
To unsubscribe, send email to email@example.com with
"unsubscribe luci-discuss" in the body.