This is going off topic (sorry) but I've been wondering for a while whether the chapters need to collaborate on a robust infrastructure for their technology needs - to increase capacity, reduce costs and deal with situations such as these (i.e. have expertise on hand and widely available).
At Wikimedia UK we're in the process of building a resilient infrastructure; with the modern capability of spinning up cheap servers behind load balancers there is no real need to have everything on a single piece of infrastructure. And the tools exist to scale horizontally if needed. Tom On 14 April 2013 15:15, Manuel Schneider <[email protected]>wrote: > Am 14.04.2013 16:12, schrieb Federico Leva (Nemo): > > Maybe the first, but in such cases usually the best is learning to link > > only a Wikimedia project page from the sitenotice or centralnotice. > > Notices get a lot of random clicks, few are interested in proceeding to > > the server where the meat is. Moreover, on our wikis we can use the > > Translate extension. > > I think this common sense rule may be added to > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CentralNotice/Usage_guidelines>. Only > > destinations tested for the load should be linked. > > Thanks Frederico. > > Done right it is really no issue. WLM 2011 was not problem, neither > Wikimania 2011 and WikiCon 2012. > > But directly linking CMSes and MediaWiki sites from Central Notice are > not a good idea. A quick notification would have helped to do it right. > The lack of notification in conjunction with weekend and people being > away from their computers is a bad combination. > > > /Manuel > -- > Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimania-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
