Chris, I think this is a good move to make for the project, and for OSGeo as well.
I don't have any particular feeling about the structure of URLs and would be fine with either structure. While I'm not involved personally in SAC, I would like to help and I can ask Shawn Barnes to help out with any migration support that you need. Cheers Paul On 13-Jan-08, at 7:03 AM, Christopher Schmidt wrote: > OpenLayers is currently (graciously) hosted by MetaCarta. This has > worked out quite well so far, but using MetaCarta hosting has meant > we've had to 'roll our own' system for authentication -- and as many > people know, this particular system is rather hacky: an email to the > PSC > list to generate a new username, which requires manual intervention. > > Part of the reason that I've never improved upon this system is that > I've always felt that it would be better to invest in moving to OSGeo > infrastructure. For a while, this was difficult, but recently, OSGeo > has > found some solutiosn which make this technically possible. > > I'd like to suggest that we move to OSGeo infrastructure for hosting > Trac and the Wiki as soon as possible. I'm less sure on the website > and > mailing lists. > > Benefits of moving svn + wiki: > * Users can create their own userid -- or use their existing osgeo > userid -- to login to either. > * Users creating tickets in trac will automatically get email > notification > on updates of their tickets. > * It will be possible to register oneself as a "CC" on a bug without > exposing an email address to the public web. > * Shared administrative resources with OSGeo -- which means that it's > not just me who can update the server, but instead the set of people > who maintain the OSGeo servers > * Shared OSGeo backup infrastructure. Currently, we're backing up > OpenLayers internally to MetaCarta, and exporting data to OSGeo: > moving to OSGeo infrastructure allows for the bcakups to be > maintained by the foundation. > > The strongest one to me is that users will be able to create their own > accounts via an automated process - no humans involved. I think this > is > very important. > > I have a couple of questions which I don't personally have an answer > to > yet: > > Currently, all OSGeo svn, trac, etc. live under URLs like > http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ , http://svn.osgeo.org/gdal/ . I do not > know > if it is possible to configure svn.openlayers.org to point directly to > the OSGeo server, or if it would be preferred for administrative > purposes to have it at svn.osgeo.org/openlayers/ . Obviously, even if > it's trivial in an administrative way, it would be more in line with > the > rest of the foundation-hosted projects to have the URL be > svn.osgeo.org/openlayers/ . Assuming that there is sufficiently good > infrastructure setup to allow for users to migrate from one to the > other, would it make sense to make the primary OpenLayers SVN URL be > the > osgeo.org/ form? > > Same question applies to trac. > > I view these aspects of the project as 'internal' -- where SVN lives > doesn't matter much, so long as it's correctly linked everywhere -- > and > would be in support of moving into the osgeo.org namespace for svn and > trac, with appropriate redirects. > > A similar question applies to mailing lists. Currently, these lists > are > [email protected] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] Moving to OSGeo > infrastructure would probably mean moving these to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (and > openlayers-trac and openlayers-commits.) Would it make sense to move > these, with proper redirects to lists.osgeo.org for both the email > addresses and the archives? > > Speaking as (essentially) the sole maintainer of the machine that > openlayers.org is hosted on, I'd like to move off whatever we can to > OSGeo infrastructure. As you can see here, one important piece of the > infrastructure piece is left aside, and that's the sandboxes, website, > etc. I think the important aspect of those changes is related to the > regular 'svn up' and rebuilding that happens. In the past, we've > discovered that doing these in post-commit hooks is bad, because it > takes too long to commit (which would be een more true now with the > NaturalDocs stuff). However, I think that we can devise a technical > solution -- using a post-commit hook to write a revision number, and a > cronjob to check whether changes have been made and rebuild if so. I > think this would allow us to move to OSGeo infrastructure for the > website as well, though there would obviously need to be some > technical > discussions for what we could do as far as doc regeneration, etc. > goes. > > This is not a motion yet: its a request for comments. I'm interested > in > moving for a number of reasons, both technical and social. Although > there are other people at MetaCarta with 'the keys' to the servers, > I'd > like to move that out to the foundation -- and I see that we get a > fair > amount of benefit from that. I'm hopeful that others agree, and we can > discuss the best way to move forward with the goal of making the > process > smooth. > > Feedback, comments, suggestions, concerns are welcome. > > (Note that at the moment, I'm not looking for technical advice on the > way to set up redirects or anything like that: we can address that > after > we address whether, and how, we *want* to move first.) > > Regards, > -- > Christopher Schmidt > MetaCarta > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |Paul Spencer [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |Chief Technology Officer | |DM Solutions Group Inc http://www.dmsolutions.ca/ | +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
