Re: Contingency planning for move

[Sriram Ramkrishna <sri ramkrishna me>]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com> wrote:

Spent a little time thinking about contingency plans if servers don't
survive the move. (Actually, this should be turned into a standing
contingency plan - almost nothing here is specific to the move, I'm
just worried about jostling during a move triggering latent hardware
failures.)

Of particular concern are the four old servers that don't have active
service contracts; if these suffered a failure, we wouldn't have a
easy path to getting them repaired in a timely fashion. We might be able
to cajole someone in Red Hat IT into putting in a replacement drive if
we mailed one out there, but that's about all.

 container.gnome.org (Sep. 2003, HP donation)
 window.gnome.org    (Apr. 2004)
 menubar.gnome.org   (Apr. 2004)
 button.gnome.org    (Apr. 2004)

(Clearly in the near future we need to look into replacing these
machines; it might be possible to recertify them but I doubt it makes
sense.)

blah, these are the ones that Intel gave you right with no accompanying service contract?  (sorry about that, my bad.. I should have negotiated something better with them)  I should see if I can cajole new servers with service contracts.

Actually, maybe we need to think about what is our policy towards donated machines like the above for.  Machines are easy to donate, but now that we're a mature project there are real IT costs that we have to deal with.

Anyways, we can talk about that later since I don't want to derail your notifications when you're busy planning a move.

sri

sri