Re: dependant services

From: Avery Payne <>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 07:17:44 -0700

On 4/28/2015 7:11 AM, Steve Litt wrote:
> Hi Buck and Avery, What's "first-class support"? Is there a way, in
> this thread, that the service behavior desired could be described,
> instead of calling it "first class support"?
Then it's best that the term be abandoned. I've tried to sum up the
idea myself, but I realize (too late) that I've been bit by a buzzword;
and I'm the one who opened their mouth and said it.

To me, first class support means "the most optimal within the given
restraints", which is almost as vague-sounding once I write it. I've
probed the idea a bit more this morning (see*)
*and found that first class support really just means "it does this,
where others don't". Simplify the idea again and you end up with "it
works". Well, duh, that's not too helpful, is it? So, I am publicly
retracting the utterance of the phrase; either service dependency is
supported or it isn't.
Received on Tue Apr 28 2015 - 14:17:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun May 09 2021 - 19:44:19 UTC