I see the same pattern in this thread that I've always seen. Tool builders think the tools will solve the problem, while no one else is convinced. The reason for this seems to be that there is a third thing, other than theory or practice, which is a factor: how the system administrator conceptualizes the problem of configuration management in his or her own head.
I think one reason for lack of acceptance is that a tool can't do your thinking for you. Configuration management is a practice, not a tool. Tools can help or hinder it. The thought process is what matters, and
that thought process is slow to develop and is not particularly helped by current tools, that strive to "do things for one" rather than "educating one" about the impact of one's actions and practices. In fact, "sophisticated" tools based upon complex thought processes "of the developer" do a poor job of justifying themselves to the novice, who sees the extra work as "busywork" without meaning. I was considering the possibility of inviting one of the staff here to describe how he thinks about or conceptualizes the problem of configuration management, but alas, I'm not sure he would have the time to come... -- Dr. Alva L. Couch Associate Professor of Computer Science Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering Tufts University, 161 College Avenue, Medford, MA 02155 Phone: +1 (617) 627-3674 Web: http://www.cs.tufts.edu/~couch _______________________________________________ lssconf-discuss mailing list lssconf-discuss@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/lssconf-discuss
