Yes indeed, thank you for sticking around. Two voices is not "all users" of course. I am receptive to your frustrations, and what I get out of your discussion is that maybe we need to make better information (always true so no news there). The main problem with the discussion was that cfengine if is a horse, why complain so publicly that it is not a good helicopter? Horses for courses.
Let's move on to how we can improve the processes surrounding the technology. M michoski wrote: > On 2/12/10 12:53 PM, "Mark Burgess" <mark.burg...@iu.hio.no> wrote: >> Cfengine 3 takes the view that you should have a language that expresses >> *safe >> convergence* and does not remove the ability of the user to express a >> configuration >> without lifting the lid and programming. Cfengine 3 = promises + patterns >> with >> knowledge >> management features. You are both missing the point completely. > > If the users all start missing the point, something's probably wrong. But > hey, at least we're here trying to see the point. > -- Mark Burgess ------------------------------------------------- Professor of Network and System Administration Oslo University College, Norway Personal Web: http://www.iu.hio.no/~mark Office Telf : +47 22453272 ------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Help-cfengine mailing list Help-cfengine@cfengine.org https://cfengine.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
