From owner-freebsd-current Sat May 3 15:35:09 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA22345 for current-outgoing; Sat, 3 May 1997 15:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (rah.star-gate.com [204.188.121.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA22340 for ; Sat, 3 May 1997 15:35:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA05082; Sat, 3 May 1997 15:34:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705032234.PAA05082@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96 To: Terry Lambert cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: -current build is now broken.. In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 03 May 1997 08:41:54 PDT." <199705031541.IAA12499@phaeton.artisoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 03 May 1997 15:34:20 -0700 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >From The Desk Of Terry Lambert : > You mean "why not ask him to help"? If so, I agree. That's the > "habitual whiner" case, above. I think it is relatively rare. Hmm... I don't think so . "Habitual Whiners" is probably a more common problem than you think. > > > 3. Is always easier to point out problems than to contribute. > > If this were true, software companies would not explicitly hire > test engineers. 8-). Yes , many companies have a problem with Test Engineering because they think it doesnt contribute to the bottom line . Test Engineers are usually ranked as second or third engineers. At any rate, Q/A is a bit different from the problem which I was thinking about. > Actually, I have been involved in a number of organizations with > significant barriers to contribution. USL, for instance, maintained Yes, so have I and they usually don't survive. > > Some companies bypass this level of cultural management and they > > just simply swamp their brilliant minds with work in the hope of > > keeping them focus in the process. > > Ah... "focus"... the 1990's substitute for "vision". "Forget vision, > if only we had enough focus, we could get that stock price up...". > Companies which do this rarely achive their hopes. Is not so much focus vs. vision is more like a focused disciplined approach to manage change and to follow a vision. What we are debating is what constitutes an effective engineering company. Bear in mind that the analytical skills which engineers bring along is like a blade which can either benefit or turn against the company. > | We've all heared that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters > | will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks > | to the internet, we know this is not true. > | -- Richard Jenkins > > (Seemed appropriate for a "process is the product" discussion). I honestly don't think is appropriate . Walk around Cisco and tell them that they are like a "million monkeys banging away..." 8) > > As for bug reporting , if I think that the bug reporter can actually > > fix the bug -- I feel morally obligated to ask for a patch well at least > > thats my attitude when it comes to public domain work. > > Maybe it was just my inherent bias here. I generally don't complain > unless there's no way for me to make the change myself. Typically, > this boils down to management vs. technology (and in my book, until > the Catholic Church builds light bulbs that work from only the data > available from doctrine, technology should win that battle). Then again we are not talking about you;however, if you do peruse the -hackers mailing list is not hard to see that there is very little cohesiveness in the way of productivity. Actually, I think that the -hackers mailing list behaves more like the "Town plaza of FreeBSD Town" where people gather together to chit chat which is not bad however is not what I consider a technical mailing list. Cheers, Amancio