Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Vlad Glagolev <stealth AT tiberian.ru>]

Hi everyone!

Sorry Jeremy, I didn't have time to argue with all of the below.
The only thing I want to say is that I have always been free to give
access to the server regarding beta+friends' fs level + sudo along with
the site itself.

But the truth is that the page:

http://beta.sourcemage.ru/Authors

still has only me, which means everyone has been busy without some time
to edit a line on the resource and ask for access (which I offered
several times). I don't want to blame anyone, though.

Reality is that with your decision and controlling the domain, almost
1.5 years of user experience went to /dev/null. You've just proved that
the desire to have it on specific hardware is more important than our
web-presence and evolution of the project. Thanks for that.

But okay, lesson learned. Too bad the price was too high though.

To the team:

Sorry for my personal outage (it never affected beta.sourcemage.ru and
bugs.sourcemage.ru though :^), I've made relocation to NYC the hard way.
But now everything is good, and I'll be using some free time to move
beta and bugs to freki. It shouldn't take more than 2 weeks.

Thanks.

p.s. My opinion on move to PHP-based mediawiki and trashing all our bug
database, -1 from me for both judgements regardless of the future path
of the project.

On Thu, 8 Oct 2015 11:03:11 -0500
Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org> wrote:

> On Oct 08, Vlad Glagolev [stealth AT tiberian.ru] wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 14:28:17 -0500
> > Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Oct 07, Vlad Glagolev [stealth AT tiberian.ru] wrote:
> > > > Except now all primary distro resources are on both my and sobukus[0]
> > > > servers'.
> > > 
> > > No, the secondary resources are there.  The things that hold the primary
> > > scm data and that the distro tools point to are primary, the things 
> > > those
> > > things redirect to are secondary.  This is why when we lost DBG, for
> > > example, we were easily able to repoint everything to other resources.  
> > > And
> > > if your nodes go away, we'd be able to do the same.
> > 
> > You're saying that the hardware you pay for is primary, and along with
> > that ours -- isn't, simply because it's not in your control.
> 
> This is both wrong and backwards.
> 
> The distro (not me, no matter how many times here you want to pretend I'm
> acting as a lone wolf to inflame the conversation, it won't make it true)
> decided many years ago it wanted to have a community approach to the server
> resources.  That is, we wanted to move from taking advantage of the simple
> offers to run primary things off various dev's resources (which are prone
> to zero access to fix problems when they go down) and instead have hosting
> resources the distro as a whole controls.  And then have a design for
> hosting that puts the primary resources there, so it's always where we can
> work with it, and takes advantage of the donated stuff by just using it to
> distribute load.
> 
> And yes, distro control, not my control.  We're not a 501(c) org or other
> official entity to actually have it in the entity's name, or we would, but
> by definition the PL and their designees at least always have as much full
> access to these resources as can be accomplished without that.
> Historically the CLs have had at least shell access, though with the
> decline in people contributing the notion of CLs has nearly gone out the
> window.  And if the distro at any time adopted a policy requiring some
> other access model, it *would be implemented*, regardless of what as I an
> individual thought of it.  The only caveat there being since it is in my
> name if I had significant conerns about it opening me up to liability
> (like, for example, if the distro voted to go all RMS and do away with user
> passwords or something), I would likely hand the ownership keys off to
> someone else and get out of the way.
> 
> I know this history pre-dates your involvement but feel to go read the
> archives, it's all there.
> 
> > But without sobukus' mirror there wouldn't be any ability for our users
> > to download grimoires and code.
> 
> This is flatly not true.  The final contingency case if we don't have other
> secondary donated resources to distribute the load has *always* been to
> host it directly off the primary.  We don't do this when we have other
> offers because those secondary ones usually have different data cap models
> that are better suited to be software mirrors, but when we have to do it,
> we can.
> 
> There have been like a half dozen (at least) of these secondary distributed
> resources we've moved between as the offers have come and gone over the
> years. ibiblio, DBG, various developer machines (seth, andrew, david, you,
> etc.).
> 
> > You call this hardware alien, but for our users this is the _only_
> > hardware they get anything from us.
> 
> More inflammatory nonsense.  It's not "alien", it's a resource the distro
> has no visibility into or way to manage if needed.  That's all I've ever
> said.
> 
> > We're paying for our servers the same as you do for yours and call it
> > distro's.
> 
> It's not the distro's because of how it's paid for, it's the distro's
> because the distro decided to create the resource and put things there and
> has never opted to change its mind.  It *does* have to get paid for, like
> anything, and lately I happen to do that.  But that has nothing to do with
> the distro's decision to put stuff somewhere.  You may as well make the
> claim I'm only calling the name the distro's because I also happen to pay
> for the registration of it.
> 
> > We participate in distribution of the sources the same way, and have
> > right to call them "distro's" as well, because they're primary nodes for
> > our users to get the code;
> 
> No, you don't have a right to call them the distro's, only the distro has
> the right to call something the distro's.  The distro is neither me nor
> you.  Me calling these resources "the distro's" and yours not is not some
> ego talking, it's a meaningful distinction on who by policy controls the
> thing.
> 
> > not that mystic master server that is not visible to anyone.
> 
> Our primary server resources are only slightly more "mystic" than our IRC
> channels.  They're where they have been for years, people interact with
> them daily, whomever the distro says should have access to them has it.
> 
> > We're all the same since we provide our own resources for the project.
> > We do not have US visas, and instant access to that TX (or not?) 
> > datacenter
> > if it's *the distro's* hardware you're calling. Do we?
> 
> As a practical matter people not in the physical area of the hardware are
> going to have problems getting to it, the same as I would have problems
> getting to your stuff.  But see above, the distro has every bit as much
> direct access as can be provided and has been requested.  To deal with the
> physical distribution as well as the fact often the distro people haven't
> been as sysadmin savvy as needed (this obviously varies with the person),
> I've also historically provided contacts to other sysadmins in the physical
> area who are SMGL-friendly and have access to fill in for me, because
> again, the distro wanted it that way.
> 
> Maybe you just didn't realize this is how it really is?
> 
> > If it's about some dedicated stuff, and not colocation stuff, we do not
> > have access to the control panel to reboot, ask for maintenance and so
> > on. There's only one key,
> 
> You as an individual may not currently have it and maybe that's a
> frustration for you but I'm not the only one that does, or the only one
> that could.  Given the general level of involvement in the distro it's
> lately been just as quick for me to get to issues as anyone else but if
> that ever wasn't the case David or Dave or the other Dave would be able to
> get in.  At least David has that contact info available, because he's the
> PL.  Before him I had that info, because I was the PL, and before him Eric
> had it, because he was the PL.  Their various assistants have also had that
> info over the years if that's what they were designated to assist with.
> 
> If the distro today wanted to vote on a policy for that access and provide
> me a list, I would implement that list.  That's what "distro ownership"
> means.
> 
> But I'm glad you understand the need to have distributed keys so well,
> because that is my entire point.  Things the distro relies on as primary
> sources (not things that just distribute the load) need to have the keys in
> the distro's control, not one person's.
> 
> > and it doesn't seem to be very stable -- I'm
> > talking about reliability: because of lack of proper mirroring our
> > infrastructure is in awful state, and you say "hell no, we don't need
> > to have mirrors!". I find it _very_ non-professional.
> >
> > But you've chosen to trash any user experience with our new website for
> > such long period of time. You prefer it that way, I see.
> 
> Vent however you need to that makes you feel better, man.  I won't pretend
> stuff isn't in disrepair, but I also won't call rational claims it's any
> worse than the state of having a current ISO, or a developed sorcery, or a
> maintained and tested stable grimoire.
>  
> > First, spent several months for nothing. Now you're providing pretty
> > senseless arguments to "protect" "the distro's" "future" from the
> > non-controllable environment, which has been up and running and
> > dedicated to *the project* for almost one year (the mirror(s) with
> > some parts of codex, sorcery, isos -- for 5+ years, though).
> > 
> > That's insane, and definitely shows what does this project mean to
> > you, when in a name of invisible protection you can sink it without
> > thinking how could that decision affect the future of the project.
> 
> The request you put the stuff on the distro's server or give us the data so
> we can do it for you is about as simple and standard as they come.  I'm not
> the one throwing fits instead of just doing that, but call what names you
> want.  This is a heckuva drawn out discussion resuling from a simple
> request to put the files where the distro can get to them if needed.
> 
> > > It's on a VM, right?  Just get me the whole chroot tarball and I'll just
> > > put that up on freki.
> > 
> > I would do that myself instead, but no, it just uses resources from one
> > of my servers with configuration of everything. It's not that isolated
> > thing.
> 
> So not only would the distro not have ability to maintain it if you were
> hit by a bus, that's not even likely to change, because it's not a
> dedicated resource.  And you think I'm the one insisting on individual
> control?
> 
> > But if we speak of bugs.sourcemage.ru, then yes, it's on a VM as I
> > mentioned in May[0].
> 
> I haven't seen as much interest in that as the www site but if the distro
> (via the PL or other method) agrees they want that one as the bugtracker
> then sure, send me the tarball and we'll get it up.
> 
> > > > > > So I still propose to set up temporary proxying from at least
> > > > > > sourcemage.org and www.sourcemage.org hosts and/or change DNS 
> > > > > > records
> > > > > > instead of wasting even more time.
> > > > > 
> > > > > If you currently don't have the time to do the migration, how do 
> > > > > you have
> > > > > the time to maintain it on your hardware?
> > > > 
> > > > It doesn't need what you call maintenance or "maintenance" that 
> > > > happens
> > > > to our current distro infrastructure. Once properly set up, it just
> > > > works with cosmetic updates of some stuff -- so it doesn't take much
> > > > time.
> > > 
> > > This is an odd claim to make given your other complaints about the 
> > > current
> > > infrastructure below.  Infrastructure always requires maintenance over 
> > > time
> > > or it degrades.  Our current stuff is not in disrepair because it's 
> > > overly
> > > complex or requires specialized knowledge, like everything else in this
> > > distro it's in disrepair because of lack of people helping, and lack of
> > > time from those that help.  Over years your setup will show the same
> > > problems without regular maintenance, let alone what happens without
> > > regular security updates.
> > 
> > And that's what I was talking about[1]. My setup is already "over
> > years", in many places, up to 10 years in a very good shape.
> > 
> > I'll tell you a secret: that's about who uses and wants to use it.
> > Everything will be fine if you're involved in development and use stuff,
> > and rotten (what we see now) if you're not really interested. That's not
> > about lack of people, but about lack of interest from your own side.
> 
> Except that I'm never claiming to be the only one to manage the distro
> server resources, or making it rely on just my time.  Staying away from
> that model is pretty much the point, and why I'm not willing to just point
> the DNS at your thing that is on your box with other things and only you
> control.  Where we have things now is in disrepair but it's a shared
> resource, the distro is in charge of how it's managed and anyone in the
> distro can get in and help with it, whether they do or not is another
> issue.  That's the secret to let it go on even if the person who was doing
> it has less time.  Again, just like sorcery, or codex, or iso.
> 
> 
> 


--
Vlad Glagolev <stealth AT tiberian.ru>

Attachment: pgpkFNk4J8BkB.pgp
Description: PGP signature