[SAC] Server Planning

[Frank Warmerdam]

Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) wrote:
> 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.

Tyler,

I am not against use of Trac tickets to document things, but I think it
is important that services on a system be linked from the SAC System
Service page so we can see who is running what, and how to get more info.

> 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 :)

Well, if we aren't carrying them over then there isn't anything to
clean up.  But if you can confirm whether or not there is anything you
want to recover, that would be helpful.

> For the sheer volume of things we are running, having as few strays as
> we have is quite an accomplishment!

Agreed.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent