From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 06:04:42 +0000 From: Eris Discordia To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-ID: <61910C8E7347685323652E54@[192.168.1.2]> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Subject: Re: [9fans] Changelogs & Patches? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 71d1193a-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > building a pyramid, starting at the top is one of those things > that just doesn't scale. For that, you have "bottom-up," right? But there's no "meet-in-the-middle" for a pyramid, or for software. Unless, the big picture is small enough to fit in one man's head and let him "context-switch" back and forth between general and particular, in which case you have to give up expanding software functionality at the one man barrier. All admirable architecture, and admirable software, is, in addition to being manifestation of great technique, manifestation of great management--even informal management is management in the end. Instead of "it all begins with Adam and Steve," as Brian Stuart suggests, ways have been found of managing large teams of people with different specializations and those ways work. The Mgmt has a raison d'etre, despite what techno-people like to suggest. --On Friday, December 26, 2008 5:30 PM -0500 erik quanstrom wrote: >> Know why Mel is no more in business? 'Cause one man can only do so much >> work. The Empire State took many men to build, so did Khufu's pyramid, >> and there was no whining about "many mechanisms that don't work well >> together." Now go call your managers "PHBs." > > building a pyramid, starting at the top is one of those things > that just doesn't scale. > > - erik >