On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 06:32:30PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Thanks for all the comments on the draft service architecture I posted
> in late July. [1] I have made a v2, incorporating the various helpful
> suggestions, and the information from the thread.
No, you just did a medium break. Mail is not web, don't do that. You
need to at least list the differences.
> Some respondents raised archive integrity concerns. It seemed best to
> address those more formally, and in a more structured way, than as a
> mailing list subthreads. Accordingly, v2 of my proposal has a formal
> risk assessment, in a format loosely borrowed from health and safety
> management.
Please describe the design changes you added to address our concerns.
The risk assessment still lists things we described as no-go.
Sorry, but I don't see how we can go forward, while you seem to be
either unable to understand what we want to tell you or just decided to
ignore it. I don't think it makes sense to continue this discussion
without a mediator.
Regards,
Bastian
--
Those who hate and fight must stop themselves -- otherwise it is not stopped.
-- Spock, "Day of the Dove", stardate unknown
