Re: gEDA-user: Launchpad (was: rant: pcb print from command line)

[Peter TB Brett <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 07:30:26 -0400, Ales Hvezda <ahvezda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> [snip]
>>So how do we explicitly get that consensus? Do we need a concrete
>>proposal to "vote" or otherwise express opinion on? Does anyone
>>strongly object if I try to write that?
> 
> I think the discussion should be more along the lines of:
> 
> 1) Leave gEDA (that includes gaf, pcb, and gerbv) split between two
>    private servers (seul.org and gpleda.org both privately funded).
> 
> 	-or-
> 
> 2) Move _all_ the projects project data elsewhere, like to SF or
>    Launchpad.
> 
> On a related note, there have been grumblings about the way things
> currently are, as evident by a fairly recent irc conversation (names
> removed and key statements cherry-picked):
> 
> "ATM Ales is a single point of failure"

This was me, IIRC.  And I wasn't, "Grumbling about the way things currently
are," I was merely pointing out things that should be taken into
consideration when people were discussing possible alternatives to SF.net
for issue tracking.  I'm sorry if my comments came across in the wrong way.

As far as you being a single point of failure, Ales, I think that it's
reasonable to let people know that the point was made in the context of a
discussion about how, in concept, private server(s) could be funded and
administered.

At the moment, gEDA's critical data -- the source code -- is quite safe,
due to the fact that we've moved to using git, so *everybody* is helping to
back up the repository (thanks, guys).  However, the "bus number" for
resources like the website, wiki and mailing list is much smaller,
*because* they're on private servers administered by Ales -- but, on the
other hand, the fact they're on private servers gives us a massive amount
of flexibility which we wouldn't get elsewhere.

One idea that's been suggested is that the various gEDA developers form a
not-for-profit corporation (or other suitable organisation), which would
hold the hosting contract and own the gpleda.org domain name, etc., but the
trustees would then delegate the day-to-day running and administration to
someone competent (e.g. Ales).  Doing things that way would mean things
work pretty much the same as they do at the moment, but that if something
*did* happen to Ales -- and we hope nothing does! -- the trustees would
have the legal ability to appoint someone to take over with a minimum of
legal difficulties or disruption to project services.

[ A further, unrelated advantage of being a not-for-profit would be that it
would be easier to accept large donations, and that it might (depending on
the jurisdiction) be possible to claim back the tax paid by the donors. ]

> If you can't tell, I don't see the value of moving just the trackers
> from one SF-like service to another, just because we don't like the
> user interface.  However, moving all the data to SF or Launchpad, that
> has my vote.
> 
> And all the data includes:
> 
> 	* webpage (though I own the domains for a few more years)
> 	* released files (current and historical)
> 	* git repositories
> 	* mailing lists
> 	* mailing list archives (also huge)
> 	* bug trackers
> 	* wiki

And as I am sure you are well aware, Ales, no project hosting service
exists that (a) would allow us to conveniently import all of the above or
(b) provides the quality of customisation and integration that we currently
have, thanks to your hard work!

As far as I am aware, *nobody* has expressed *any* dissatisfaction with the
seul.org or gpleda.org services, or how you run them.  My consideration
through the course of the recent discussions, both on- and off-list, has
been, "How can we avoid putting any additional burden on Ales?"

If you *don't want to* administer the gEDA server(s) any more, then we
should discuss alternatives.  However, I hadn't realised this was a
potential problem -- and if it is, it's much bigger and more serious than a
discussion about, "Do we want to move issue tracker, or not?"

Peter

P.S. The current problems with SF are considerably more extensive than, "We
don't like the interface."  Nevertheless, having a sane interface is a
fairly critical factor if you want people to actually use it.

-- 
Peter Brett <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Remote Sensing Research Group
Surrey Space Centre


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user