[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Possible packages...

On 09/17/2009 07:48 AM, R P Herrold wrote:
>> 2009/7/13 Adam Williamson <awilliam redhat com>:
>> The Infrastructure group has a rather ongoing project to try and find a
>> really good calendar server system (and then, obviously, package it)
>    ...
>> It's proved a bit tricky, though, to find a really perfect option.
> 'The perfect is the enemy of the good (enough)' and a sure
> fireway to attain gridlock rather than progress
<nod>.  Note that this isn't precisely the reasoning that makes this
gridlocked.  Similar to choosing a CMS, there's a lot of choices where
none of them are very good fits for what we want.  But many of them are
very good fits for what a subset of users want.  This means that
anything that we have looked at so far is going to be unsatisfying to a
large number of people.

We finally got traction on the CMS by doing two things:

1) Defining the "features" (broadly defined -- deployment issues,
security, and maintainability also count as features) that were needed
for any solution.

2) Taking some infrastructure concerns out of the picture by making the
rule that we need several new admins to come with the decision.  That
means instead of current infrastructure personnel supporting the CMS
deployment, infrastructure gains new admins/coders willing to support
the new service.

Not sure if we're ready to try (2) again until we've seen that the CMS
deployment and subsequent maintainence works out, though.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]