Public SourceMage Discussion List

[David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>]

On 05/02/2015 06:54 PM, Thomas Orgis wrote:
> Am Sat, 02 May 2015 17:13:46 -0500
> schrieb David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>: 
> 
>> On 05/02/2015 04:13 PM, Vlad Glagolev wrote:
>>> Hello all!
> 
>>> At the end, I vote for getting back to bugzilla and putting it as our
>>> bug-tracker along with the new website[2], speaking of which, yet
>>> another month has passed over
> 
>> Are you calling for an official vote, and if so, exactly what is it you
>> are calling for a vote on?
> 
> Well, perhaps we actually can have a nice little vote about the bug
> tracker. It makes more sense if there's an opposing path forward, too,
> though. Also I'd fear that there's a vote and nobody shows up.
> 
> I think it's a given that the current tracker is not really working. It had
> me also confused that the sorcery tracker is to be found at a different
> place (grimoire and sorcery being separate projects on the chiliproject
> platform). Also I have a hard time getting folks to work with me on the
> tracker, for some reason. Vlad: Does bugzilla have proper mail
> integration like the Debian one? I really like to be able to add to bug
> discussions using my mail client …
> 
> And yes, we actually had processes around the old tracker.

Process isn't dependent upon the tool.

> 
> I'm a fan of not tampering with history and thus also see value
> in keeping old referenced bugs around. Too often I see problems
> recurring, hacks loosing context and calling to be re-applied. It also
> sucks that bug IDs mentioned in HISTORY and commit messages loose
> meaning or are reappearing after a tool change. I wonder how Vlad
> intends to integrate the chili issues.

That's fair. I didn't see value in keeping around ancient bugs that were
never going to be fixed, I was hoping for a fresh start. I couldn't
contribute to this, sadly, and so maybe my dream of that is completely dead.

> 
> This also ties in with the whole website thing.
> 
>> Unfortunately, if there had been progress, it would've been reported.
>>
>> I have been reasonably transparent regarding the amount of time I have
>> for server things and I believe our server admin has as well.
>>
>> Dates cannot be promised. Is this no longer acceptable?
> 
> I tend towards suggesting that "acceptable" has its limits. We're all
> doing this in spare time (that we do or do not have, besides existing
> or non-existing real lives), there's no support contract and binding
> obligations besides the social stuff.
> 
> After some time you cannot avoid noticing that Vlad is really putting a
> lot of work into this. Revitalizing the whole website from the … let's
> say "sorry" … state we have now. Way to spend the holidays. Now all
> this crazy work on the bug tracker. Doing some grimoire releases in
> between, too.
> 
> David, wouldn't you also be a teeny little bit frustrated if _nothing_
> happens after several months? I don't want to blame folks, and of
> course everyone has constraints, but don't you think Vlad deserves some
> reaction to this _huge_ amount of work he invested in SMGL?

What kind of reaction do you think he deserves? How do we go about
implementing whatever reaction it is?

Most of what (I think) needs to happen isn't related to the site and the
wiki, although they have suffered, and the new site is quite impressive,
if spread across a large number of technologies.

> 
> I'm amazed at the enthusiasm Vlad still shows. Clearly there's a lot of
> self-motivation going on.
Indeed, and that's an excellent thing.

> 
> Back to the server … what about the suggestion for setting up a proxy?
> I'm not sure how well that would work technically, but this should be
> doable without being present at the site. I'd also have though that
> it's possible to set up the new website on the thing if replacing the
> hardware just takes too much time.

This would basically amount to a transfer of administration. The
existing box would just be a silly little box with nothing on it.

I don't have any keys to the sourcemage.ru infrastructure, I don't know
how it's backed up, if at all, or what happens if something fails. I
wouldn't have any authority to fix things, unless that's willing to be
given.

Only git, and the @sourcemage.org email addresses would remain under my
authority.

--
David Kowis

> 
> 
> Alrighty then,
> 
> Thomas
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature