Is it just me?

[Luis Motta Campos]

On Jul 5, 2007, at 2:21 PM, Daniel Barlow wrote:
> Luis Motta Campos wrote:
>>   Hum. Not necessarly. Static / read only pages scale quite well  
>> with just the addition of more hardware. But the guy should have a  
>> number for this before creating pages.
>
> Honestly, I don't see why.

   Sorry, it was too specific case.
   This specific guy is making something for the counsil. The counsil  
serves a more-or-less well know number of people. This takes us to a  
nice expectative about the maximum number of clients.

> Either it's small enough to be negligible (and judging from Andy's  
> past experience, this is probably a reasonable assumption)

   I agree with this.

> or the whole thing will be a massive unexpected and unpredicted  
> success.
>
> My point is: as IT professionals we protest when we don't know the  
> answer to something and are asked to come up with some bullshit  
> number anyway (I'm thinking mostly about timescales[*] here): why  
> do we expect the same from the client?  Of course, if he _does_  
> know this information then he should say, but if not then exactly  
> how much use in practice is his wild guess going to be?  Better to  
> know it's unknown, then at least you can think about how you'd find  
> out ("soft" launches, gmail-style invitation-only betas, etc) and  
> make some plans.  Knowing that you don't know is a much better  
> place to be in than thinking you do.

   This is what I meant. I guess that my english needs some more  
improvement to be able to discuss this kind of stuff. :-)
--
Luis Motta Campos (a.k.a. Monsieur Champs) is a software engineer,
Perl fanatic evangelist, and amateur {cook, photographer}