On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 12:17 PM Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 7:10 AM clime <cl...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:59, clime <cl...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 12:48, Aoife Moloney <amolo...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Good Morning Everyone, > > > > > > > > I wanted to share with you some information regarding the current > > > > state and future of Communishift. The infrastructure team presented > on > > > > this project back in 2019 during Nest [1] [2], and since then, we > have > > > > deployed it, started using it and had to shut it down for > > > > the colo-move. > > > > > > > > As a number of people have noted, it has not come back up yet, and > > > > during Nest this year, we had hinted that communishift is not going > to > > > > come back alive looking > > > > the same as when we shut it down, and that is unfortunately true. > > > > > > > > The idea for communishift was to give to anyone in the community a > place where > > > > they could run any application they wish to provide to the community. > > > > This was a proper place where Joe and Jane could offer the service > foo to the > > > > foo SIG without engaging the infrastructure's team responsibility to > keep the > > > > service up and running. The infrastructure team would have been able > to say: > > > > "well the openshift cluster is running, so if the app isn't, talk to > the > > > > application maintainer, there is nothing we can do about it". > > > > > > > > Basically, it gave a place where we could experiment with new apps > > > > without adding too > > > > much work to the infrastructure team. > > > > > > > > However, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) [3] and the > California > > > > Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) [4] basically makes the Fedora > Infrastructure team > > > > (and thus Red Hat) responsible for the content hosted by any > services running in > > > > our infrastructure. In other words, the Fedora Infrastructure team > would be > > > > responsible to answer all GDPR/CCPA related requests and > requirements for any > > > > and all services running in communishift (services that the team has > 0 knowledge > > > > about, that's the whole goal of communishift). > > > > > > > > For these reasons communishift is not going to come back to life in > the same way > > > > it was shut down for the colo move. > > > > > > > > We have not given up on the original idea though (ie: providing a > place where > > > > community members can deploy applications without adding work on the > > > > infrastructure team), however, as with anything involving legal, > this is going > > > > to be a slow process. We will share any information as soon as we > are able. > > > > > > > > > > > > We're sorry for the inconvenience this causes, we really would like > the > > > > situation to be different but we also appreciate these regulations > for what they > > > > are (protecting our personal information) so we want to respect them. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hoping this clarifies the situation around communishift a bit. > > > > > > > > Aoife, Kevin & Pingou > > > > - On behalf of the Fedora Infrastructure team > > > > > > Hello Aoife, > > > > > > is it working right now so that I can deploy my community app there or > > > currently not working at all? > > > > Or better...is there at least some alternative or some way to deploy a > > community app > > these days? Or currently none. :) > > > > My read of this is that right now, there will be no way for the > community to run applications in Fedora Infrastructure in a way that > CPE can be divorced from it completely. That is because their goal of > running only OpenShift and then not caring about what's inside is > legally not possible. > That's correct and as a team we are not setup for handling GDPR requests like other teams in Red Hat. In many ways this regulation is punitive to teams / companies who have not set themselves up with it in mind. Other teams in Red Hat are setup for this and we are trying to work with them to provide the relevant functionality, just divorced from the CPE team from a workload perspective. > > Consequently, when the OpenShift cluster returns (if it even does, I > am unsure that it will, since running multiple OpenShift clusters > doesn't make sense anymore), it will require a vetting process of some > kind (that has yet to be created) to ensure that CPE is comfortable > with partial responsibility of the application, since they need to > care about the data it stores. > Legally we have to have agreements with the service owners and still be on the hook as the overall owner of it, it's messy and complicated but you are correct, there is a path forward through vetting and good processes. > > So, I guess... wait and see? > Finger crossing helps :) > > > > -- > 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > -- Leigh Griffin Engineering Manager Red Hat Waterford <https://www.redhat.com/> Communications House Cork Road, Waterford City lgrif...@redhat.com M: +353877545162 IM: lgriffin @redhatjobs <https://twitter.com/redhatjobs> redhatjobs <https://www.facebook.com/redhatjobs> @redhatjobs <https://instagram.com/redhatjobs> <https://red.ht/sig>
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
