system-hackers service agreement
daniel at pocock.pro
Thu May 19 19:45:39 UTC 2016
On 19/05/16 21:26, Florian Snow wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> Thank you for all those suggestions. I think it is a bit early to set
> up such an agreement. We just started the first team and we will need
> to figure out how to best work between the system hackers and blog
I agree it is a bit early to make it a formal agreement
It is not too early to start drafting it though
Given the size of the system-hackers team, it is actually really
important for them to declare what they are willing and able to support,
it is that simple.
How they do that may be based on some of the suggestions in my original
email and/or examples from similar volunteers in other organizations
(e.g. the DSA team in Debian)
> Since we don't have big requirements, the blogs are a nice testing
> ground for this cooperation. Right now, my suggested guideline would
> Anything OS related is the system hackers' responsibility and anything
> application/service related the blog hackers' responsibility. That
> line may become a bit more blurred in the future and then we need to
> decide how to continue from there. Right now, the differentiation is
> pretty clear though, especially if we use Wordpress from upstream.
> I am a big fan of planning things ahead of time, but at this time, I
> wouldn't know what to plan. We have a running setup that needs to be
> migrated. The result will probably not be the ideal solution yet, but
> a step to make the blogs reliable again. For the time being, the blog
> hackers team need to find out the necessary steps for the migration.
> Generally, we are talking about exporting the database and
> the files, and then testing upgrade paths on the new system. There
> may be additional in-between steps that we will need to determine
> first. For example, this morning, the MySQL dump did not run cleanly
> and that means the database needs to be fixed first. There are
> probably other things we need to figure out along the way.
I wasn't aware MySQL was involved. Is there any interest in moving to
PostgreSQL? For example, all Debian infrastructure uses PostgreSQL now
and if you aim to follow the support model for Debian infrastructure, it
may be a good idea to use the same SQL back-end too.
> After that, we will have a better overview of what we have and what we
> think we should have. This will enable us to make good decisions
> about the future of the platform in regards to technology. That may
> be the time to set up the kind of service agreement you suggested.
> For the time being, I am happy to just contact Albert quickly to say
> "Hey, would you please have a look at this.". That is also a more
> efficient use of ressources with limited man-power right now.
> Happy hacking!
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at fsfeurope.org
More information about the Discussion