dragonchild and I got into a bit of a tussle over here and we finally arrived at the crux of the matter.
dragonchild, in private message to me, said this about web administration of databases (e.g. a CGI script to backup and restore a db):
I guess my point really is "Either it's a toy, in which case whatever, or it's not, in which case procedures are needed. That includes no web administration, period." If your company depends on this, then treat it like your company depends on it
I find that really admirable (no sarcasm) and I'm glad there are people like you who take data administration seriously. Let me give an example of why, although I admire it, I still can't accept it as a rule written in stone. I work mostly for not-for-profit organizations that use databases to provide information to communities in need. Sometimes I have the luxury of starting the organization from scratch but more often then not, I walk into an IT nightmare caused by years of not having the funds or knowledge to do the right IT thing. I have a client now whose ISP told them they had ssh privs but never actually activated a login account and who has not responded to requests in over a month. Get a new ISP says I. Next funding cycle says they. Meanwhile, the community that depends on information from the organization is going without. So ... do I let the community do without, quit and move on to a job with a reasonable IT setup, or do I hack something together with FTP and web administration to keep the thing working for a couple of months until we transition to the new ISP?
There are more contexts than just "toy" and "real business". The rules that apply in the different contexts are different. In some contexts, flexibility trumps purity of design.In reply to On contexts, rules, flexibility and purity by jZed
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |