POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : Yeah, that again... Server Time
11 Oct 2024 11:09:42 EDT (-0400)
  Yeah, that again... (Message 11 to 17 of 17)  
<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages
From: Phil Cook
Subject: Re: Yeah, that again...
Date: 31 Oct 2007 12:02:31
Message: <op.t02mtzauc3xi7v@news.povray.org>
And lo on Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:55:12 -0000, Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull>  
did spake, saying:

> I'm surprised nobody commented on this one...
>
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/153

I did think about it, but it would simply have been along the lines of  
"Leave it in and see if anyone notices"

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com


Post a reply to this message

From: Orchid XP v7
Subject: Re: Yeah, that again...
Date: 31 Oct 2007 16:02:12
Message: <4728ed54$1@news.povray.org>
> Is the network numbering scheme the same, or does it change?

Same.

> Same number of subnets, same routers, etc?

Still 1 subnet, still 1 router. Still with all the same configuration.

> Server IP addresses stay the same?

Also staying the same.

> ISTR you said it's all happening at once, so maybe these things aren't 
> changing.

The *only* thing that might change is our external IP address. If so, 
that will require reconfigurating the router. (And the other VPN 
endpoints it talks to.) The nodes on the LAN won't care...


Post a reply to this message

From: Orchid XP v7
Subject: Re: Yeah, that again...
Date: 31 Oct 2007 16:02:49
Message: <4728ed79$1@news.povray.org>
Sherry Shaw wrote:

> NEVER underestimate the power of random human silliness.  ALWAYS TEST 
> EVERYTHING.

That is why I will personally be doing all the disconnecting and 
reconnecting... ;-)


Post a reply to this message

From: Orchid XP v7
Subject: Re: Yeah, that again...
Date: 31 Oct 2007 16:03:59
Message: <4728edbf$1@news.povray.org>
Phil Cook wrote:
> And lo on Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:55:12 -0000, Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> 
> did spake, saying:
> 
>> I'm surprised nobody commented on this one...
>>
>> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/153
> 
> I did think about it, but it would simply have been along the lines of 
> "Leave it in and see if anyone notices"

Hey, it's QA! Trust me - they WILL notice.

(The last document I sent their way was rejected due to my typing "me" 
instead of "my". 25 page document, and they rejected it for that...!)


Post a reply to this message

From: Tom Austin
Subject: Re: Yeah, that again...
Date: 1 Nov 2007 07:39:35
Message: <4729c907$1@news.povray.org>
Orchid XP v7 wrote:
>> Is the network numbering scheme the same, or does it change?
> 
> Same.
> 
>> Same number of subnets, same routers, etc?
> 
> Still 1 subnet, still 1 router. Still with all the same configuration.
> 
>> Server IP addresses stay the same?
> 
> Also staying the same.
> 
>> ISTR you said it's all happening at once, so maybe these things aren't 
>> changing.
> 
> The *only* thing that might change is our external IP address. If so, 
> that will require reconfigurating the router. (And the other VPN 
> endpoints it talks to.) The nodes on the LAN won't care...


I see two thins that need checked.

Check that the network connectivity is actually functional.  After all 
you are disconnecting a network cable.

Check how clean the QA butts are (you've even mentioned a cute one in 
there).  After all, they don't like trouble.







More so - does QA understand the change that is happening and what they 
are asking for?  Too many times a non-techie person asks the techie guy 
for something that is stupid because they do not understand the technology.

Or, it could be that QA really does have to have it retested for 
certification or something similar?

Here's a good chance.  Find cute QA girl and have a conversation about 
what it is that QA is really after ;-)



Tom


Post a reply to this message

From: Nicolas Alvarez
Subject: Re: Yeah, that again...
Date: 1 Nov 2007 11:31:24
Message: <4729ff5c$1@news.povray.org>

> Sherry Shaw wrote:
> [snip hilarity]
> 
> It's impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.

Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.


Post a reply to this message

From: Bill Pragnell
Subject: Re: Yeah, that again...
Date: 1 Nov 2007 11:35:38
Message: <472a005a@news.povray.org>
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

>> Sherry Shaw wrote:
>> [snip hilarity]
>>
>> It's impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so 
>> ingenious.
> 
> Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.

The goal of science is to build better mousetraps.
The goal of nature is to build better mice.


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.