On Wednesday January 2, phillips@bonn-fries.net wrote:
>
> Yes, that's all +5 insightful, except... what makes you think any one of the
> Linux core hackers is irreplaceable? I know you didn't say that, but you
> did say 'single point of failure', and it amounts to the same thing.
>
I think that the difference is that there is no planning to make sure
that no-one is irreplaceable. Sure people can be replaced, but it
might take a while. A subsystem might be unmaintained (or
under-maintained) for a while until some sucker^Wdeveloper puts their
hand up. That isn't a situation that a "fortune 500 bureaucracy"
would be able to tolerate. But we seem to cope.
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 21:00:16 EST