[6199] in SIPB bug reports
Re: sipb-nonmem and prospectives with write bits on install volumes in sipb locker
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sam Hartman)
Mon Oct 28 18:11:51 1996
To: srz@MIT.EDU
Cc: bug-sipb@MIT.EDU
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans@MIT.EDU>
Date: 28 Oct 1996 18:11:04 -0500
In-Reply-To: srz@MIT.EDU's message of Tue, 22 Oct 1996 01:27:28 -0400
>>>>> "srz" == srz <srz@MIT.EDU> writes:
I really hate to bring this up again, but I feel that I'm
right. Basically, I have been fairly busy and haven't had to catch up
on this until now.
srz> There is a difference between the SIPB locker and the
srz> sipb-new locker. The former is a supported service of the
srz> SIPB. The latter is a development project that's been under
srz> development for years, and probably could stand a little
srz> fresh blood from prospectives to get it going.
True. However, the sipb-new locker will become a supported
service if it is successful. As a SIPB member, I would like to make
sure that this service is supportable. I argue that having similar
requirements for the two services will significantly decrease the
time required to validate the sipb-new locker from unsupported to
supported status.
I agree that having prospectives involved in the development
process is good and useful. However, there is no good reason that a
member cannot look over the prospective's work before installing it.
I would argue that in all cases this is good.
srz> -stan
