On Fri, 31 May 2002, P Witte wrote: > If all this is practicable then I think this is the way to go in this day > and age. However, backups must be considered: It must not all depend on a > single person. If he goes down - or more likely his site - there should be > somewhere else to turn to without delay. I'm behind that. My server has RAID, does daily backups to a different machine, and I keep weekly off-site backups. I would quite like to have at least one backup 'mirror' for this if it gets the go-ahead. > Im all for it. If we could just convince Wolfgang - and Richard! I think we > deserve a big party! You need an excuse for a party? Strange fella! Dave
- Re: [ql-users] Just anot... Geoff Wicks
- Re: [ql-users] Just anot... wlenerz
- Re: [ql-users] Just anot... Mike MacNamara
- Re: [ql-users] Just anot... wlenerz
- Re: [ql-users] This is the LICENCE James Hunkins
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E Proposals wlenerz
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E Proposals wlenerz
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E Proposals Dave P
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E Proposals P Witte
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E Proposals Dave P
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E Proposals wlenerz
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals wlenerz
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals dndsystems1
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals Mail Delivery Subsystem
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals Robert Newson
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals Tony Firshman
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E propos... Dave P
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E propos... Timothy Swenson
- Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E proposals dndsystems1
