We continue to develop resources related to the COVID-19 pandemic. See COVID-19 initiatives on Appropedia for more information.
Appropedia talk:Site development/archive (Admin tasks)
The creating of this page prompts me to ask a question that's been on my mind. How is backup handled? Is that a service that DreamHost provides? "Included" in the fee? Etc. I was planning to ask whenever we speak person-to-person, but who knows :-)
In part this is prompted also by my day job. I work for Brocade (a storage networking company) and my current task involves investigating backup strategies. So don't read too much into my question. I'm curious, and of course I want Appropedia and everyone's hard work to be safe, but for the most part I assume you've got that all handled. (Sometimes I think it's not fair to put such high expectations on admins, but it's either that or second guess everything.)
Anyway, let me know. Or point me at the DreamHost package that explains it all, or whatever.
Thanks, --Curtbeckmann 16:47, 3 October 2006 (PDT)
I think unless there's a reason to protect the page, we should unprotect it. Partly to be consistent with principles of openness, partly because as we continue networking, we may get input from technically minded people from other wikis. --Chriswaterguy · talk 14:23, 3 March 2007 (PST)
- Hi Chris,
- Thank you for your comment. The reason behind locking the Admin tasks page is that this page is a record of tasks that only Admins (specifically tech admins) could have done... mostly server side changes. I think what really should happen is that this page should have a more appropriate name and a description of its purpose. What do you think? --Lonny 03:03, 4 March 2007 (PST)
- Certainly there would rarely be a need for anyone else to edit it. But then, it's also pretty unlikely that anyone would edit it without a good reason, e.g. to add a helpful comment to a "current task" or a suggestion following "Still not working correctly." Particularly as we're currently talking with a bunch of other potential admins who might conceivably be looking around the site. It's mostly theoretical, but I still favor unprotection unless there's a danger to be avoided. --Chriswaterguy · talk 04:34, 4 March 2007 (PST)
- The page is now unprotected. Thank you, --Lonny 15:40, 22 March 2007 (PDT)