Les Mikesell wrote:
On 9/17/2010 3:30 PM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
All I'm saying is that it often turns out to be a whole lot more work than the initial 'configure, make, make install', so you either have to train the users to do their own copies in their own space so it will scale, or be very careful about how much of this you take on. And I'm saying this from experience. It's not much different from writing your own code where the initial cut is about 10% of the work of maintaining it - and if the upstream project goes away or takes a direction not compatible with your use, that's where you end up anyway.
Having spent far more of my career as a software person, let me say that what I've installed not from rpms or other packages has been nowhere near as much work as writing it... esp. when you factor in creature
feep, er,
feature creep, and "oh, I meant this, not *that*...."
I think it is pretty hard to draw a line between code and custom configuration and what you have to do to keep them working as other things change. For example I once ran smail with some custom tweaks to
My experience has been different. When I'm working as a developer, it's *all* development. When I've installed some software for someone, it may be a pita to install, but then I only once in a while have to go through that again, and the next time, I know most of the things that need doing. Not something to take up most of my week. <snip>
If you have different users needing these things on the same machine you
Um, no. Our users, or teams, each have a number of servers: dev, test and prod. <snip>
You might have run into the CPAN issue if you installed something like RT in the Centos 4 era.
Ugh. When I was with AT&T, 3-4 years ago, we looked at RT, and blew it off for Mantis, which was *much* easier to work with.
Hmmm, or was there some other project management software I installed. <shrug> It's been a few years, and I ain't there with notes.
mark