[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian services and Debian infrastructure



On 21/01/14 at 15:07 +0000, Stephen Gran wrote:
> I think there's quite a range of options between "DSA can't host
> everything under the sun" and "I'll go set up a private parallel
> development environment out of project funds without any further
> discussion".

I don't know who you are quoting here, but I never said that "I would go
set up a private parallel development environment out of project funds".

What I'm doing currently is what I wrote in the mail you replied to:
> > However, it sounded pointless to argue on that if there is no concrete
> > offer to host Debian's services being developed outside of Debian
> > infrastructure.  So, since that discussion, I've been talking to a few
> > hosting providers, and two of them have offered to support Debian with
> > free resources (on their clouds) for Debian development. Since I think
> > that avoiding vendor lock-in is a must, I'd like to make sure that we
> > can get a third one on board before working out further details.

That is, *explore the possiblity* to get *free* resources for Debian
development.

> > Now, of course, I'm very disappointed that nobody from DSA is interested
> > in acting as a gateway between service developers and hosting solutions
> > outside of Debian infrastructure that would be suitable for services in
> > development and experimental/maturing services. In my eyes, that would
> > have been a win-win situation, by putting DSA in the perfect position to be
> > aware of emerging services, and to interact early with service maintainers.
> > But, well, I cannot force anyone to do work that they don't want to do.
> 
> So, I offered at one point to set up an openstack private cloud for DDs
> to use for service development and so on.  I got almost as enthusiastic
> a response to that as we got to kerberos, AFS, and now MQ.  I decided
> to let it go instead of putting lots of energy into something that no
> one would use.  That sort of thing can be revisited if it's actually
> interesting for people.

FTR, I agree that the demand will not be huge for that. Probably in the
order of 4-8 services hosting requests per year. However, I disagree
that no one would use that. I know of at least two services using VMs on
EC2 for service development currently.

If we can avoid spending DSA's time on a private OpenStack Cloud by
getting free resources, and solve the problem of providing a
development infrastructure that way, I really think that this is the
way to go.

> I'm not sure what you picture when you talk about us acting as a
> gateway.  Perhaps you could elaborate on that.  I'm not keen on playing
> script monkey to set up machines for people - I'd much rather that
> interested people be able to do that for themselves.  If you just want
> us to be a point of contact for people developing new services, I think
> we've said several times that we'd like to be just that.

I think that the tasks involved would be something such as:
- Work with hosting providers so that we have some diversity in the
  offerings, and avoid vendor lock-in.
- Understand the offerings (what's available? possible?)
- Document the various offerings (wiki page)
- Understand what prospective service maintainers are asking for, in
  terms of resources. Maybe provide advice on design.
- Do the matching between what service maintainers need and the hosting
  providers
- Maybe provide some support to service maintainers (e.g. for dealing with
  the specifics of each hosting provider)
- Maybe make it possible to install DSA-flavored VMs on the various
  Clouds, using the resources pointed to in [1].

  [1] 20140109083128.GA12356@varinia.lobefin.net">http://lists.debian.org/20140109083128.GA12356@varinia.lobefin.net

There's nothing here that *needs* to be done by DSA, but it would
certainly be very helpful to have DSA members involved.

> > However, it sounded pointless to argue on that if there is no concrete
> > offer to host Debian's services being developed outside of Debian
> > infrastructure.  So, since that discussion, I've been talking to a few
> > hosting providers, and two of them have offered to support Debian with
> > free resources (on their clouds) for Debian development. Since I think
> > that avoiding vendor lock-in is a must, I'd like to make sure that we
> > can get a third one on board before working out further details. That
> > will include deciding how allocation of such resources happen, and where
> > discussion about this should happen. My first choice would be to use
> > debian-services-admin@ for that, but of course that will be your decision
> > as I don't want to 'pollute' the list with traffic you are not interested
> > in.
> 
> No, that's precisely the sort of thing the list is for, I thought - it's
> not a private list for DSA or anything. Not sure where the word pollute
> or its scare quotes have come from, but it sure feels hostile.  I'll
> assume you don't mean it that way.

Well, if DSA has nothing to do with this development infrastructure
they don't host, it could have made sense to have a separate list for
that, just to keep the signal/noise ratio high for services hosted on
DSA-managed infrastructure. That's why I clearly don't want to push that
on you. Similar to #debian-admin vs #alioth.

> I have some operational questions about this cloud setup, since it seems
> you've delegated running Debian owned machines to us and then gone and
> got some that you don't want us to run.  I'm not sure what to do with
> that disjuncture.

I don't know what you are talking about. Where did I "got some Debian
owned machines that I don't want DSA to run?"

Lucas

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: