Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Github as primary source repository for SourceMage?

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Github as primary source repository for SourceMage?
  • Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 12:00:27 -0500

On Sep 18, Thomas Orgis [thomas-forum AT orgis.org] wrote:
> Am Wed, 17 Sep 2014 19:20:52 -0500
> schrieb David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>:
>
> > Given a recent revival of interest in SourceMage, I brought up on IRC
> > that we could move our primary repositories, wiki, and issue tracking to
> > Github.
>
> Apert from my instinctive reaction that tends to prefer self-hosting
> just for the heck of it and the tendency to run into the other
> direction when everyone is heading towards X (X being github nowadays),
> I have to wonder ... WHY NOW? Shouldn't we get our code together and
> produce a new stable release without rearranging our infrastructure?
>
> I even don't really get what we had from the last website move. It's
> not that much happened with the new one and it never really got into
> shape. Finding information is a nightmare ... with bits of various wiki
> generations popping up, and, well ... we all know what happens with
> project management (issue tracker etc.) infrastructure if there is
> nobody bothering to use it.
>
> Anyhow: Is there a technical reason why we have to consider a move
> _now_? Could we please discuss such stuff after having something like a
> release? Or are we jumping on the bandwagon of folks who just put their
> stuff onto github for everyone to get and don't bother with tagging any
> version and providing tarballs? You know, the upstream vendors that
> really make our life as Grimoire Gurus a pain.

+1 to these points.

> That might be a point: Who is paying the SMGL server at the moment?

David answered this already but I'll give some more details here. Me, at
around $100 USD/mo. That's a 10 year or so old price obviously. If we
migrated even to the other datacenter environment I use it'd be a lot less
cost for better hardware and control.

> What kind of setup is it (redundancy, service, blah)? I admit that the

The main node (fawkes) is where code gets committed and tarballs get
generated, but users don't pull from there. The main download server is
hosted at my old company still, they donated a decent box and bandwidth
because their entire environment is SMGL. It automatically pulls the
tarballs down throughout the day and DNS and apache are configured to point
people there. There's also a defunct mirror on ibiblio we could fix if we
ever took the time or felt the need. NS and apache are designed to be
redundant, not all of those are up at this point but again we could fix it
if we felt the need.

I've been meaning to mention that neither I nor Dave J still work at DBG
for some months now, so there's a chance that mirror goes away at some
point. If that happened we'd at least want ibiblio working again, or some
other free main mirror option. If any of you have ignored the warning to
not hardcode the dbg.download.sourcemage.org names into your grimoires and
the like, please do fix that at some point so you don't ever end up SOL.

> Somehow it is strange that folks putting together their own GNU/Linux
> are afraid of running their own server

To be very clear, I don't see any technical problem with continuing to run
our own, nor am I asking it to move. I still use SMGL in production all
over the place. I've just become convinced that my server profile needs
are different from other people's, because I don't run into any of the
issues other people seem to with stability.



Attachment: pgpqJZ6CQ9V3M.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page