Re: Is existing documentation kind of vague?

[MJ J <mikedotjackson@gmail.com>]

There are no emotional reactions - there are simply statements that I
won't be submitting to your condescending attitude. I have also been
working in this same arena for 20 years and I have long ago found what
is need to make large systems function. Perhaps if you would drop the
zero-sum-game attitude wrt to your own consulting business and agree
to see other points of view, we would advance the state of the art.

But I won't be asking you for approval as to which advice I can give.
And that is basically the sum of what I told you personally as well.

-mike

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com> wrote:
> MJ J wrote:
>> You're right, except for the fact that deploying 2 lines of new code
>> into production can still be a long process ;-) The phrase comes to
>> mind: If it ain't broken, don't fix it.
>
> You're free to decide to ignore good advice.
>
> But you have to accept that someone might point out flaws in your
> solution to prevent other list readers falling into the same trap. Your
> emotional reactions on-list and off-list are completely inappropriate.
>
> With security hat on: The sum of such loose ends make out the attack
> surface.
>
> Personally even after almost 20 years with LDAP I'm a dwarf standing on
> the shoulder of giants. And I'm still learning.
>
> In particular in the context of this discussion I'm happy that others
> wrote down protocol specs for improving robustness, e.g. RFC 4527 etc.
> Especially since I already had to track down read-after-write issues in
> replicated deployments with so-called enterprise software - which can
> take days.
>
> Ciao, Michael.
>