Re: QUESTIONS RE: Maintenance of AOO Wiki and Forum
On 17 August 2015 at 23:23, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote: Thanks Tony, this reminds me of some questions that would help us understand what is involved. These questions are anyone knowledgable of the current arrangements: I see four levels of support to wikis and forums: 1. User Account and Content Administration I believe this is handed. Does anyone believe it is not? this is done by the wiki administrators. 2. Administering the Running Service That is, a server administrator for the service (not necessarily the host) Is this done? Do we need a replacement or an expansion here? What are prerequisite qualifications for being able to do this. I do that at the moment. I would strongly suggest at least an expansion. 3. Administrating the Server that hosts the Service I assume this is where one deals with Ubuntu upgrades and such, whether the server is real or virtual. Is this provided by the project? Do we need a replacement/expansion here from within the project? Again, what are prerequisite qualifications? Yes it is provided by the project, and actually it is extremely hard to divided 2 and 3, they are interconnected. I strongly suggest at least an expansion, also because the project might have wishes which I would not see, are be able to facilitate (e.g. change the login configuration). Sysadm experience brings you a long way, otherwise it is not hard to read up on Mediawiki, mysql, ATS and Ubuntu. 4. I assume hardware IT support is not the business of the project, and changing boxes is a different deal. Yes? It is vm´s and not physical boxes. At the moment one of the biggest problems is how to recreate them if they break. Infra nowadays use Puppet for that purpose. The Vms are defined in puppet2 but not puppet3. I suspect this is known. I don't know if the necessary information is anywhere in project materials (haven't looked). It is in the mail archives and on the vms themself. This is an area of ignorance for me. I am not raising my hand. I just want to ensure that the necessary requirements are understood and we know what is and is not adequately covered. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Tony Stevenson [mailto:t...@pc-tony.com] Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 12:54 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: Maintenance of AOO Wiki and Forum On Fri, 14 Aug 2015, at 01:31 PM, jan i wrote: Hi. The AOO Forum vm could do with an upgrade to Ubuntu 14.04 and be defined in the new puppet structure. Defining it in the new puppet structure has the advantage that Infra can roll a new vm in case of problems, and thereby reducing downtime. The AOO Wiki vm is in strong need of a reconfiguration and update (Ubuntu 14.04 see above). Currently there is a ATS running on the same vm in front of the mediawiki (django) application. The ATS veersion is no longer supported by the traffic server project. Running it on a separate vm (or even as the HTPPS proxy) has a lot of merit, but it has not been done. As I am reducing my engagement in the project, this might be a good time for a new maintainer to step up. The actual maintenance is about 1 hour pr month. Can I take this opportunity to remind the community that if this service fails to be maintained appropriately it will be turned off, or made unavailable by Infra until such time it is brought up to date and managed. Tony@ I assume you by maintained really think of security, Infra do not care which version of e.g. mediawiki the project uses, as long as there are no known security risks. AIUI this was the agreement that we had with the project when it was handed over to enable you to manage yourselves. I can confirm, that is what I have been told when I started, and how I handled it. rgds jan i. Many thanks, -- Tony - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: QUESTIONS RE: Maintenance of AOO Wiki and Forum
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 02:23:48PM -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Thanks Tony, this reminds me of some questions that would help us understand what is involved. These questions are anyone knowledgable of the current arrangements: I see four levels of support to wikis and forums: 1. User Account and Content Administration I believe this is handed. Does anyone believe it is not? How do you mean handled? This function is managed within the two products by those who manage them already. In other words this is fully devolved to the AOO PMC to determine how this should be managed. 2. Administering the Running Service That is, a server administrator for the service (not necessarily the host) Is this done? Do we need a replacement or an expansion here? What are prerequisite qualifications for being able to do this. Again this is down to the PMC to determine how to best do this. Right now Infra provide a number of VMs for AOO to run the service on. This is mostly due to significant historical inertia when AOO first joined the ASF, but also because it is what the PMC wanted to make their lives easier. If you want these to be come more managed by Infra then a significant number of changes would need to be made to make this happen. Not least of which is moving the system into Puppet. This is a non-trivial piece of work which I'd estimate would take a member of paid staff at least 4-6 weeks to complete (minimum). 3. Administrating the Server that hosts the Service I assume this is where one deals with Ubuntu upgrades and such, whether the server is real or virtual. Is this provided by the project? Do we need a replacement/expansion here from within the project? Again, what are prerequisite qualifications? Again, due to historical inertia and what I suspect is fear of letting go in the past (perhaps even now in the present) this element was handled at the PMC's discretion - with the caveat that Infra would force an update where required (say SSL vulnerability etc), or if the PMC did not do it itself the service would be shutdown and the instance shutdown until such time that the problem had been resolved. Right now, I do not believe that these instances are being properly maintained, and are in need of significant TLC to make them tick along nicely once more. However, owing to the obscenely difficlut (and in my opinion frankly ridiculous) setup of the services this is near impossible to do well. 4. I assume hardware IT support is not the business of the project, and changing boxes is a different deal. Yes? Correct, the PMC is provided with a number of virtual machines (not native hardware, just to avoid any confusion). If you need to move (and frankly I would push for this very hard) we would need to stand up the new instances for you, based on an open discussion of your requirements. Infra are responsible for making sure that the instances are up, and that the hardware they run is available. I suspect this is known. I don't know if the necessary information is anywhere in project materials (haven't looked). This is an area of ignorance for me. I hope I have helped clarify somewhat. -- Many thanks, Tony pgpEMbLdOugGK.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: QUESTIONS RE: Maintenance of AOO Wiki and Forum
Oh, sorry Tony. I was hoping other on AOO could supply what they know of this situation. I was clear that the project has responsibilities for (1) and thank you for clarifying (2-3) which appear to be in dangerous shape. Thanks for clarifying that these are AOO responsibilities in particular. I would like to know who are providing effort in categories (2-3) at the moment and also their view of the situation and the required capabilities. I suppose any retiring incumbents can also specify what the qualifications for a successor are and then we can see who is equipped to perform such work. - - - - - - - It seems the next question is to understand the desired state we want for the MediaWiki (that's the one?) and the Forums in terms of sustainable operational support and what is a roadmap that can get us there. We also need to look at the most urgent steps and the least that can provide relief. Is that what you see needed at this rather high level? Finally, assuming it could be done, is there any benefit to Puppet for non-Infrastructure usage or are we talking about a regime that is specific to operation under ASF Infra? - - - - - - - It should be obvious that I am an Infrastructure dufus. Yet I think the AOO community needs to have a clear picture and also awareness of the gravity of the support that is required to be provided by the project. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Tony Stevenson [mailto:t...@pc-tony.com] Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 14:42 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org Subject: Re: QUESTIONS RE: Maintenance of AOO Wiki and Forum On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 02:23:48PM -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Thanks Tony, this reminds me of some questions that would help us understand what is involved. These questions are anyone knowledgable of the current arrangements: I see four levels of support to wikis and forums: 1. User Account and Content Administration I believe this is handed. Does anyone believe it is not? How do you mean handled? This function is managed within the two products by those who manage them already. In other words this is fully devolved to the AOO PMC to determine how this should be managed. 2. Administering the Running Service That is, a server administrator for the service (not necessarily the host) Is this done? Do we need a replacement or an expansion here? What are prerequisite qualifications for being able to do this. Again this is down to the PMC to determine how to best do this. Right now Infra provide a number of VMs for AOO to run the service on. This is mostly due to significant historical inertia when AOO first joined the ASF, but also because it is what the PMC wanted to make their lives easier. If you want these to be come more managed by Infra then a significant number of changes would need to be made to make this happen. Not least of which is moving the system into Puppet. This is a non-trivial piece of work which I'd estimate would take a member of paid staff at least 4-6 weeks to complete (minimum). 3. Administrating the Server that hosts the Service I assume this is where one deals with Ubuntu upgrades and such, whether the server is real or virtual. Is this provided by the project? Do we need a replacement/expansion here from within the project? Again, what are prerequisite qualifications? Again, due to historical inertia and what I suspect is fear of letting go in the past (perhaps even now in the present) this element was handled at the PMC's discretion - with the caveat that Infra would force an update where required (say SSL vulnerability etc), or if the PMC did not do it itself the service would be shutdown and the instance shutdown until such time that the problem had been resolved. Right now, I do not believe that these instances are being properly maintained, and are in need of significant TLC to make them tick along nicely once more. However, owing to the obscenely difficlut (and in my opinion frankly ridiculous) setup of the services this is near impossible to do well. 4. I assume hardware IT support is not the business of the project, and changing boxes is a different deal. Yes? Correct, the PMC is provided with a number of virtual machines (not native hardware, just to avoid any confusion). If you need to move (and frankly I would push for this very hard) we would need to stand up the new instances for you, based on an open discussion of your requirements. Infra are responsible for making sure that the instances are up, and that the hardware they run is available. I suspect this is known. I don't know if the necessary information is anywhere in project materials (haven't looked). This is an area of ignorance for me. I hope I have helped clarify somewhat. -- Many thanks, Tony - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr
