Backup Central

On Wednesday 05 May 2004 09:44 am, Jesse Guardiani wrote:
Hi Matt,

I was just wondering if you think it is wise to reply to items
on the Wiki? That is sort of what the mailing list is for, and
it will make it more difficult for Kern to catch up if he has to
follow threads in the mailing list AND on the wiki.

I was thinking that we could just list items of interest on the
Wiki, then link to the corresponding thread in the mailing list
from there.

That way Kern can get an overview from the wiki and read
the gritty details on the mailing list if he wants to.

What do you think?

Both seem like acceptable collaborative mechanisms to me -- My concern=20
with linking to GMANE threads is that GMANE doesn't always get the=20
entire thread. People starting threads through replies, and mailers=20
that don't use the "References" header (Mike, Mark, Johan, et. al. =20
will make for a partial image of the conversation.

I suppose what I was thinking of was keeping the text of KernReadMe to=20
the most *urgent* bugs, and taking note of any other bugs/suggestions/=20
etc. in the other pages. If the "other" pages are indexed and=20
maintained well, then we should only need a link to the tops of those=20
lists in KernReadMe, kind of like escalating a ticket in a ticketing=20
system. :)

I'm copying the list to hear suggestions on this. I'd like for us to=20
try our best to find resolution for issues, before listing them on a=20
page like a list of chores for poor Kern. That's also partly why I=20
wrote that response on the wiki page -- I tried to document a=20
legitimate answer in order to save Kern the typing when he returns. :)

But, consider me a lowly webmaster -- I control not the content. There=20
are people on the list whose suggestions on this matter I would lend=20
far more creedence than my own.

=2D-=20
Matt Howard <mhoward < at > ha...> =A0http://hattmoward.org
PGP: 2364 B8D1 199C 4DB6 9E23 =A02409 C10B EC85 29B9 91EE

Matt Howard wrote:

On Wednesday 05 May 2004 09:44 am, Jesse Guardiani wrote:
Hi Matt,

I was just wondering if you think it is wise to reply to items
on the Wiki? That is sort of what the mailing list is for, and
it will make it more difficult for Kern to catch up if he has to
follow threads in the mailing list AND on the wiki.

I was thinking that we could just list items of interest on the
Wiki, then link to the corresponding thread in the mailing list
from there.

That way Kern can get an overview from the wiki and read
the gritty details on the mailing list if he wants to.

What do you think?

Both seem like acceptable collaborative mechanisms to me -- My concern
with linking to GMANE threads is that GMANE doesn't always get the
entire thread. People starting threads through replies, and mailers
that don't use the "References" header (Mike, Mark, Johan, et. al.
will make for a partial image of the conversation.

I suppose what I was thinking of was keeping the text of KernReadMe to
the most *urgent* bugs, and taking note of any other bugs/suggestions/
etc. in the other pages. If the "other" pages are indexed and
maintained well, then we should only need a link to the tops of those
lists in KernReadMe, kind of like escalating a ticket in a ticketing
system. :)

I'm copying the list to hear suggestions on this. I'd like for us to
try our best to find resolution for issues, before listing them on a
page like a list of chores for poor Kern. That's also partly why I
wrote that response on the wiki page -- I tried to document a
legitimate answer in order to save Kern the typing when he returns. :)

But, consider me a lowly webmaster -- I control not the content. There
are people on the list whose suggestions on this matter I would lend
far more creedence than my own.

Well, I'm frustrated because I don't think your response is a good argument.
For example, my chio-bacula command will pull the list of tapes currently
in the autoloader from a file, so `update slots` works fine for me. With
other autoloaders `update slots` is pulled directly from a bar-code scanner.

I didn't really want you to feed me a supposed solution, I just wanted Kern
to think about it when he gets back. But now your response seems to dismiss
or lower the legitimacy of my question so that Kern may not even read it,
or think it is important.

However, I'm not about to just remove your text, because that could possibly
create a war. And I don't want to reply to it because that just gives Kern
more reading to do in multiple places.

And what's up with Dan's question below yours? I already put Full backups
and incremental backups on one tape. Bacula manages it fine. I don't think
Kern's ReadMe is the appropriate place for that question.

We need to normalize these communications channels, folks. Otherwise we
need to assign someone to personally maintain the Wiki. Creating another
(in this case Web Based) mailing list type of discussion forum isn't going
to save Kern any time.

--
Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator
WingNET Internet Services,
P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605
423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f)
http://www.wingnet.net

Jesse Guardiani wrote:
Well, I'm frustrated because I don't think your response is a good
argument. For example, my chio-bacula command will pull the list of
tapes currently in the autoloader from a file, so `update slots` works
fine for me. With other autoloaders `update slots` is pulled directly
from a bar-code scanner.

I didn't really want you to feed me a supposed solution, I just wanted
Kern to think about it when he gets back. But now your response seems
to dismiss or lower the legitimacy of my question so that Kern may not
even read it, or think it is important.

However, I'm not about to just remove your text, because that could
possibly create a war. And I don't want to reply to it because that
just gives Kern more reading to do in multiple places.

And what's up with Dan's question below yours? I already put Full
backups and incremental backups on one tape. Bacula manages it fine. I
don't think Kern's ReadMe is the appropriate place for that question.

We need to normalize these communications channels, folks. Otherwise
we need to assign someone to personally maintain the Wiki. Creating
another (in this case Web Based) mailing list type of discussion forum
isn't going to save Kern any time.


I had considered removing my text and copying it into a list-post
earlier, but I wanted to wait for a response to this thread. I had
forgotten about chio-bacula or similar tricks because I looked at it
before, but it wasn't the right solution for me -- sorry, I just put a
mental block over that.

Wiki is very intentionally a dynamic medium. There is nothing wrong
with removing or relocating text that someone else wrote -- it is
polite to include a comment explaining the action when it is done to a
signed paragraph. I like open discussion, and I don't want to see
anyone frustrated or angry with me.

I agree that KernsReadMe should be the executive summary -- kind of like
that report they hand to the US President every morning, except we'll
try not to understate terrorist threats. ;)

Dan's question... does seem strange at the first read, but I think it
simply looks that way due to the tersity of the paragraph. Dan: Can
you explain this more, on the list? (That is, when you have the time)

--
Matt Howard <mhoward < at > si...>
Superior Insurance - Technical Services



RE: [Bacula-users] Re: Who maintains the documentation? From: Mark Schoonover <schoon < at > am...> - 2004-05-05 21:24

Not too long ago, there was someone here who made a "roadmap" of the
relationships in the configuration -- something like that would be
useful also.

Hopefully that can be included in the tutorial.

I'm the one that put the RoadMap together. You can view the pdf from here:

http://files.amgt.com/~schoonm/BaculaRoadMap.pdf

Bold items need to be the same in the various conf files. Items that are in
italics are required.

HTH

.mark

Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 16:13:27 -0400
From: Frank Sweetser <fs < at > WP...>
Subject: Re: [Bacula-users] voting
To: Ryan Novosielski <novosirj < at > um...>
Cc: bacula-users < at > li...
Message-ID: <46671567.8090703 < at > wp...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Ryan Novosielski wrote:
You know, it may be overkill... but then again, haven't we as a
community sort of been clamoring for a Bacula-official wiki for awhile?

Well if there has been some clamoring, I have missed it -- especially
considering that there is already an excellent Bacula wiki.

What is missing is a link from the Bacula web site to the wiki which I am now
investigating.

I know you may not want to be the one doing that work, but I wonder if
we can't kill two birds here with one stone.

I've been running a DokuWiki installation with bacula related info on
http://paramount.ind.wpi.edu/wiki for awhile. It's not fully official in
that
it's not under bacula.org, but kern certainly knows about it, and has pulled
some of the manual correction stuff into the main docs.

Yes, very true. I would like to pull more for the manual, but I have so many
things that I am interrupt driven, which means that unless someone explicitly
brings something to my attention, I never find the time to do these things.

Didn't you (Frank) express and interest in putting essential and appropriate
wiki info into the main doc?

Regards,

Kern

DokuWiki looks to
have a pretty good plugin system, so if someone with more PHP-fu than I have
wants to try writing up a suitable ranking system I'd be happy to host it
there.

--
Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu | For every problem, there is a solution that
WPI Senior Network Engineer | is simple, elegant, and wrong. - HL Mencken
GPG fingerprint = 6174 1257 129E 0D21 D8D4 E8A3 8E39 29E3 E2E8 8CEC

------------------------------