I think anyone who wanted something like this would be better served by paying attention to the svn changelog and only updating after a day or two of inactivity. All of the information needed is available.
We won't adopt any practices which increase our workload without obvious benefit.
Delaying svn commits is the #1 cause of the "missing include" bug being committed.
Adam.
Tristan Rhodes <tristanrhodes@weber.edu> wrote:
I update automatically in cron.daily. Because you tell me to.
If i have to choose between shiny/new and stable, i will always choose stable, all other things being equal.
On 08/02/2013 07:23 AM, Adam Armstrong wrote:
A majority of users actually seem to update pretty regularly.
We assume this is because they like the new things (and the fixing of problems) rather than because we told them to, because the only people we tell to update regularly are the 10% of users present on this list :)
Adam.
Paul Gear <observium@gear.dyndns.org> wrote:
On 08/02/2013 07:03 AM, Adam Armstrong wrote:_______________________________________________
On 2013-08-01 21:30, Stefan Milo wrote:"Agree" is much too strong a term; "tolerate" would be better; "it's
A tool like observium is often used by people in Operations. People inWell then, you probably want to be using Cacti. Judging by the update
Operations tend to favor stability over new features. The old if it's
not broken mantra...
habits of our existing userbase, they agree with us.
better than using Cacti" would probably be more accurate than both. :-)
_______________________________________________
observium mailing list
observium@observium.org
http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
observium mailing list
observium@observium.org
http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium
_______________________________________________
observium mailing list
observium@observium.org
http://postman.memetic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/observium