On Fri, 11 May 2012 12:11:36 +1200, Michael Hudson-Doyle <michael.hud...@canonical.com> wrote: > On Fri, 11 May 2012 00:30:26 +0200, Alexander Sack <a...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Ricardo Salveti > > > Sure, I just think there are better places for it :-) Based on issues > > > we had with LAVA and Jenkins at the previous cycle, if I had one email > > > for every issue, I'd send at least 20 of them, which is useful but > > > that still doesn't make me send them to the list.] > > > > Actually, I think LAVA outage was announced. I poked for getting more > > status updates, so more mails would have been great. > > > > Same goes for ci.linaro.org ... if our CI service used for everything > > but android is not available, I want to get a mail that this is the > > case. > > So, what this discussion points to is: we need a process for handling > disruptions to the services we provide. When the **** hits the fan, the > last think you want people to be doing is _thinking_, or at least, > thinking about things that could have been thought through ahead of > time and are not totally specific to the incident at hand. > > Just recently within the LAVA team, we've started following such a > process: > > https://wiki.linaro.org/Internal/LAVA/Incidents > > (apologies to the non-Linaro insiders for the internal link). The > process will look very familiar to anyone who works at Canonical... > > Creating a wiki page for each incident can feel a bit heavyweight,
It turns out that moin has a funky NewPage macro (https://wiki.linaro.org/HelpOnMacros#Others) that one can use to make this really easy. So we've scrapped the Google document. Cheers, mwh _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
