On Monday, December 17, 2018 12:57:56 PM EST Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > The reason is that discourse and other many other tools people 'want' > are not light weight 'oh just throw a server up and have your thing in > 2 minutes and never look at it again'. They are tools which you need a > lot of infrastructure set up and running, and a strong commitment of > time and effort to keep running. Once you set it up beyond the base > example version every website says you can do, you find that more and > more staff and time are devoted to keeping it going.. just like the > Fedora Build System and all its related tools take up a lot of time, > effort, and money. When you try to run these in parallel or in 'spare > time' you end up with the main 'product' slowing down, and the others > ones getting stretched out because the amount of time you can put > towards it eats into the main product. > > So it becomes very compelling to let a company that is dedicated to > running the complex tool to do so.
I'm sorry, but as a sysadmin, especially with experience un-dockerizing Discourse, I just can't take that at face value. Discourse, though a pain to update, is not really that hard to host. Maybe an hour of effort a week, max, if you're doing it entirely manually. Sure, complexity increases when you add plugins, but not significantly. I just hope we're not paying for that thing, though we probably are. -- John M. Harris, Jr. <joh...@splentity.com> Splentity https://splentity.com/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
