[SAC] Server Planning
Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo)
tmitchell at osgeo.org
Thu Feb 18 19:21:14 EST 2010
> The wiki.osgeo.org instance has been well documented - it is certainly
> listed in the status document. I was more the moodles, ocs, planet, etc
> that were not documented. In fact, I'm mostly responsible for not getting
> the qgis migration documented and have rectified that to a modest extent.
> If I had to wrap knuckles I think they would mostly be Tyler, Mateusz, and
Is it agreed then, that we have a laid out process for how you'd like it
all documented, so that we all follow the same protocols? I think some
thought having a trac ticket open was enough, or even an email on the
SAC list or tagging a wiki page with the "infrastructure" category.
Your prodding has brought up the most excellent idea of having it all
hang off the server status page - works for me - then if it's not on
there in the future, then it can be assumed redundant.
I still like using trac as much as possible to see the progression of
things, but keeping a wiki page outlining things is valuable too. Too
many choices? Either way, let's link off the server status page.
The ocs and moodle stuff were tests not worthy of documenting, or osgeo2
was use as a dev environment before running live on osgeo1 - either way
I'll take responsibility for cleaning up those messes I made :)
For the sheer volume of things we are running, having as few strays as
we have is quite an accomplishment!
More information about the Sac