I fully agree, and this was also my thought in this regard... David
On Tue, 13 Nov 2001, Dan Kuykendall (Seek3r) wrote: > Matthew Copeland wrote: > > > > The big problem with a distributed architecture wuith regards to project > > maintenance is handling data backups. One of the big bonuses of > > centralization of source code is easy backup. If everything is > > distrubted, you have to worry about your local group doing proper backups. > > So, if you went a distrubted route, it would probably be a good idea to > > make it so that data automatically migrates between servers to a series of > > master servers that have the diskspace and the backup equipment to back it > > all up, or provide as part of the installation describe how to do all of > > the backups. > > This simply means that you must be responsible for picking a responsible > host. I think the choice is important enough that its very worth it. > If you have a centralized solution, and for some reason (finiacial, a > fire, an earthquake, war) they collapse, then everyone goes down with > them. > I think that its proven that lots of smaller organizations provide for > stability better than one big group who becomes too powerful. > > Seek3r >
