New design, what is the Goal here?

pak_lfs at freemail.gr pak_lfs at freemail.gr
Wed Nov 30 01:11:42 PST 2005


Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> rl at nezumi.plus.com wrote:
> > AFAIK people have not proposed a particular type of authentication.
> > What has been proposed is that this authentication is built into alfs,
> > and that alfs is a client/server system.
> >
> > I think this adds a huge amount of pointless complexity. Imagine that
> > three of the 90 machines you want to update are turned off. An email
> > based system would use e-mails built-in store and foreward abilities.
> > An http/cron solution would also let those machines catch up in their
> > own time.
>
> lol. I'm sorry. These solutions you're suggesting don't add pointless
> complexity? The point is there are *many* different methods that you
> *could* conceivably use now to control several automated builds at once
> using a host of tools that you must first install and configure and sort
> on each machine.
>
> What we want is all this ability tied up nicely in one package that's
> *designed* to automate our builds and manage several machines. We're
> designing the system from scratch, but that doesn't mean that every
> piece of the puzzle has to be our code. We can use security libraries
> that already exist.
>

I guess the only thing we want is a *convenient* system to manage
multiple/remote systems. Nothing more, nothing less. If the ssh solution
is proved to be more convenient than the other ones, then at least that's
what I, personally will adopt. I don't think anybody here has M$-like
"not invented here" syndromes.

OTOH, it is really a moot point to say that a free software project
"shouldn't" implement a feature you don't need/like, just "because".
It is only valid to say that "for proven technical reason X, this is
unimplementable" or something like this. I haven't seen that so far.

Or, you could also say: "OK, if you like this, go on and implement it
but please think of us who don't like/need this functionality and try
make us not pay for something we don't want - make it pluggable"

I 'm just saying nobody should be ignored and we shouldn't just
build for ourselves. So, a question:

* Would you all guys and girls who do not want/like a client/server system
contribute to a design that would make this functionality pluggable?

Remember everybody that in OSS, it is always consensus that builds the
best systems.

Thanks,
Pantelis

____________________________________________________________________
http://www.freemail.gr - äùñåÜí õðçñåóßá çëåêôñïíéêïý ôá÷õäñïìåßïõ.
http://www.freemail.gr - free email service for the Greek-speaking.



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list