On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 10:08:34AM -1000, Tom Gordon wrote: > That's considering the symptom is immediately recognizable. It > won't be with a newbie.
With the tech coordinators, it would be safe to assume most are newbies. But hiding the update process from them does not improve their learning one bit. Developers need to be active in the process too; they are the source of the bugs in the first place! > I usually wait for complaints from the users. In a one-man-show > you don't have hours to spend every day verifying every detail. > Developers and TCs probably have better stuff to do than what > sysadmins do - and it's better to have the updates and a dented > cog than not, in that case. If you are responsible for some systems, then part of your role you fill is the lowly sys admin. It does not matter that your primary role may be something else. I am not talking about a full audit after every update. Automate the entire update process as much as you can, except for that last critical piece where someone pushes the big green "Go" button. My main point is about being available in the rare and unfortunate event that things break. A fully automated update process removes the administrator's availability. Users cannot complain to you if their desktop breaks while you are not in the office. (But, maybe that is a good thing, afterall.) -Vince
