"Michael K. Edwards" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 7/15/05, Rich Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > I am having a hard time reading this as anything but a non sequitur. >> >> Umm; it follows more from Manoj's comment than yours. > > Ah. OK.
Should have sent two postings :-> > >> > Personally, I prefer for a solution to be demonstrated to work, both >> > socially and technically, before it is enshrined in policy. Drafts >> > are, of course, welcome at any stage. "Rough consensus and running >> > code." YMMV. >> >> You scale an organisation, I understand, by removing the *need* for >> everyone in it to be a genius at everything it does. > > Bingo! You also take care not to formalize unduly, or you get a > sclerotic bureaucracy. Given the difficulty of getting agreement in this place, I think that unlikely. (As a practicing SubGenius, I like to think of the "ornery, cussing Debian", up there with the Two-Fisted Jesus, and the Butting Buddha. Others may have other views) > >> Hence the comment about the US army: "designed by genius to be run by >> sergeants". > > As a close associate of several sergeants in the US Army, I question > only the "designed by genius" part. Given what armies do for a > living, Darwinian selection is probably also a factor. :-) Helps. The British Army likes to send officers out in front - produces lots of dead heroes in the upper classes, as well as reducing incidence of fragging... By the way, a spot of Google produces: Child (1984) cited A machine designed by geniuses to be run by idiots, Herman Wouk, The Caine Mutiny, on the organization of the wartime US Navy. [snip sane remarks] >> >> Exactly: that and an indent script in the checkin routine remove any >> issue. > > As long as it's purely advisory, please -- no tool is perfect > (although TeX is damn close). > >> See how that compares to policy, which is hopefully implemented in such >> a way as to be mechanically testable? > > To within certain limits, as demonstrated by lintian and linda -- up > there with dpkg and debhelper in the pantheon of Debian's > contributions to the world. Not quite on par with the DFSG, but > that's only to be expected; the DFSG is not intended to be testable by > a machine that is less than Turing-complete. :-) I get asked from time to time by academics for interesting projects for their students. I think I now have another: Implement a system capable of using standard AI techniques to process the (a) existing judgements and (b) content of debian.legal such that it can issue plausible analysis of a new software license... cheers, Rich. > > Cheers, > - Michael > -- rich walker | Shadow Robot Company | [EMAIL PROTECTED] technical director 251 Liverpool Road | need a Hand? London N1 1LX | +UK 20 7700 2487 www.shadow.org.uk/products/newhand.shtml -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
