[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 07/11/2019 18:07, mr meowski wrote:
On 07/11/2019 17:48, Giles Coochey wrote:Well, that's exactly what we have, and it always works.Ah lucky you, you must have one of those new magic systems that never does anything wrong or suffers from bugs.
I think this would warrant a different discussion, as it is clearly outside of what Neil is seeking assistance about. But, I take, and nibble: If you have worked in an environment where employees have had experience of nothing but, fix, fix and fix again, against an environment, where engineers were taught to: 1: Not just fix the problem in the short term. 2. Add your fix to the automation program (if you can't do it yourself, see an automation engineer to do it for you). 3. Automate 4. Iterate When automation fails (by someone fixing an issue at step 1, but not going forward with 2-3), then you have a problem, train the employee, or if that fails, then you have no option, get rid of them. Iterate the above for all changes, and you will eventually end up with a stable system (unless of course, all your employees were already up on this and were doing it anyway). If you don't follow processes that have stability designed into them, then you will encounter issues, what is the problem? PS I have yet to find a citation source from you on the Pfsense "tainted" issue you mentioned when you replied to my last input on this list. -- Giles Coochey -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG https://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq