On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:08:30PM +0200, Frank Lenaerts wrote:
>...
> As base is quite small, it could be released more frequently. The not
> base part could evolve independent from the base part.
Consider e.g. a g++ transition or a transition to a new version of perl:
There is no simple way to combine parts that have finished the
transition with parts that haven't started the transition.
> The not base part could be split further into parts. These parts could
> be things related to mailservers, things related to webservers,
> database servers, IDS, end-user workstations, ... Because each of
> these not base parts are smaller, they too can be released more
> frequently.
>...
This will result in a complete chaos.
E.g. how do you plan to ensure smooth upgrades from any combination of
parts to any other combination of parts?
> This would certainly mean lots of work, especially regarding handling
> bugs, upgrades, security fixes, ... (as each of the subprojects would
> have their own responsibility), but, complexity can only be resolved
> by other complexity.
>...
Nonsense.
If it's too complex, it's time to rethink and restructure the thing to
make it simple enough.
> cu,
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
