infrastructure February 2009

infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org

60 participants
77 discussions

Re: tiket #86
by Dmitry Kolesov 22 Feb '09

22 Feb '09

Hello Toshio. It is channges for the pkgdb-client what I did if I understood You right: 200c200,203 < pkgdb.clone_branch(package, branch, options.masterBranch) --- > if options.masterBranch: > pkgdb.clone_branch(package, branch, options.masterBranch) > else: > pkgdb.clone_branch(package, branch, 'devel') -Dmitry

2 1

Infrastructure Tickets
by Mike McGrath 21 Feb '09

21 Feb '09

Just a reminder for you to all check your infrastructure tickets. If you are working on them, great. If not, unset them so we know and can assign them to someone else: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/report/7 -Mike

2 1

Outage Notification - 2009-02-21 14:00 UTC
by Mike McGrath 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

There will be an outage starting at 2009-02-21 14:00 UTC, which will last approximately 1 hour. To convert UTC to your local time, take a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UTCHowto or run: date -d '2009-02-21 14:00 UTC' Affected Services: Buildsystem CVS / Source Control Database DNS Fedora Hosted Fedora People Fedora Talk Mail Mirror System Torrent Translation Services Websites Unaffected Services: None Ticket Link: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1199 Reason for Outage: Rebooting all the servers to take in new kernel update. You will note this will take place 1 hour _before_ the koji update and fsck which is scheduled for the entire weekend. This is another friendly reminder of that. Contact Information: Please join #fedora-admin in irc.freenode.net or respond to this email to track the status of this outage.

1 0

How to request a new mailing list
by Paul Lange 20 Feb '09

20 Feb '09

Hello, I am a member of the Mono SIG. We would like to have a own mailing list. However the request template at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/RequestForResourcesTemplate seems unsuitable. In my eyes it's for projects that require stronger web- and hardware-resources. Can you point me to the right place to ask for the creation of a new mailing list? Thank you! Paul

2 1

Intro and an apology
by Thierry 19 Feb '09

19 Feb '09

Apologies for hijacking a thread.... Hi all, my name is Thierry and while I attempted getting involved circa 2 years ago [1] life took its toll in the form of redundancy with its aftermath and international moves so, now that I am (somewhat) back in control, I would love to finally get on with it and help. As the message referenced below states I have been involved with sysadmin for a reasonably long time and believe I can help. My current occupation deals with a full overhaul of the monitoring infrastructure for a public service using Nagios and a lot of packaging on the side... I have read the GettingStarted, my FAS username is thierry. cheer Thierry [1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2006-November/msg00095.html

2 2

introduction
by Jony Cohen 19 Feb '09

19 Feb '09

Hi, my name is Jony I'm 24 and have a B.Sc in math & computer science I'm working as a sysadmin/sysdba on *nux\Oracle envirment for the last 5 years (the *nix includes RHEL 4,5, HP-UX, Tru64) I've worked with clusters, web application servers and databases, where the main focus was on the DB and clusters. I know python, perl, C, C++, Java, PL\SQL and of course bash, tcsh, awk... I guess my expirence as an Oracle DBA is not much of a use in your envirment... my user name in FAS is cohenjo I would like to join the following groups sysadmin-devel and sysadmin-dba (I understand that the 2nd group is restricted, than lets start with devel...) I guess NOC and tools would fit also... I'd like to contribute any way I can... just let me know what i can do :) - Jony

2 1

Plan for L10n for Fedora 11
by Dimitris Glezos 18 Feb '09

18 Feb '09

I'm very happy to announce that we've now landed support for translation statistics in Transifex. Lately we've been working heavily in re-writing Transifex and getting v0.5 in the best shape possible for Fedora 11. Being 3 weeks ahead of the string freeze, we have plenty of time to test statistics on Transifex 0.5-devel. For Fedora 11, my plan is to switch the old DL for Tx 0.5-devel for statistics, and continue to use the proven Tx 0.3 for submissions. I've requested [1] a publictest instance from the Infrastructure Group to install it and start putting data and testing it. [1]: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1191 To allow 2 weeks of testing, the instance should be ready by 23/2. When we see that everything works out as it should, we can discontinue the old DL. Our goal with Transifex 0.5 is to include support for both submissions and statistics, and this way we can put aside our old version of Damned Lies which is presenting outdated translations. Since only the commits are missing from Tx 0.5-final, it'll be out in 3-4 weeks, and at that point we go on and test submissions too, while having Tx 0.3 as a backup solution. Some of the advantages of this approach is that using the statistics from Tx 0.5-devel does not even require hook-up with FAS (only submissions require authentication), we have a smoother upgrade path for Django/v0.5 and we have a codebase we know inside-out to build/invest on. On our roadmap post v0.5: - 0.5: Submissions to email,VCSs, probably bugzilla - Comments everywhere - Full API - Integration with Bugzilla eg. for auto-closing of bugs - Workflow functionality (lock a file, resolve bugs, request translation review and others, comments) - Fine-grained permissions on a per collection, release, projects, component, language and file basis - Support for people Teams and user groups - Support for additional i18n formats (mozilla) Comments, suggestions? -δ -- Dimitris Glezos Jabber ID: glezos(a)jabber.org, GPG: 0xA5A04C3B http://dimitris.glezos.com/ "He who gives up functionality for ease of use loses both and deserves neither." (Anonymous) --

2 3

Re: Plan for L10n for Fedora 11
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 17 Feb '09

17 Feb '09

----- "Piotr Drąg" <piotrdrag(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Please just note that DL is working perfectly in last few days after > cache rebuild and it should display correct and updated statistics > now. and since last week Asgeir has been busy working on updating Fedora's DL to the latest Django codebase from upstream, which is already running well for Gnome. Jens

1 0

Needed: mod_wsgi SOP
by Toshio Kuratomi 17 Feb '09

17 Feb '09

Anyone here want to write up a short SOP on deploying a mod_wsgi application? FAS and Bodhi configuration in puppet can serve as a reference for doing this and lmacken, ricky, and I can answer questions. It can be short and other people can expand on it later. We don't need to go into details about creating the wsgi script (although a little bit can't hurt) but mainly focusing on how to construct the apache config file. What directory to place the wsgi script in, etc. This would complement the present TurboGears and Supervisor SOPs. -Toshio

1 0

Re: Plan for L10n for Fedora 11
by Asgeir Frimannsson 17 Feb '09

17 Feb '09

----- "Dimitris Glezos" <dimitris(a)glezos.com> wrote: > I'm very happy to announce that we've now landed support for > translation > statistics in Transifex. > > Lately we've been working heavily in re-writing Transifex and getting > v0.5 in > the best shape possible for Fedora 11. Being 3 weeks ahead of the > string > freeze, we have plenty of time to test statistics on Transifex > 0.5-devel. > > For Fedora 11, my plan is to switch the old DL for Tx 0.5-devel for > statistics, and continue to use the proven Tx 0.3 for submissions. > I've > requested [1] a publictest instance from the Infrastructure Group to > install > it and start putting data and testing it. > > [1]: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1191 > > To allow 2 weeks of testing, the instance should be ready by 23/2. > When we > see that everything works out as it should, we can discontinue the old > DL. > > Our goal with Transifex 0.5 is to include support for both submissions > and > statistics, and this way we can put aside our old version of Damned > Lies which > is presenting outdated translations. Since only the commits are > missing from > Tx 0.5-final, it'll be out in 3-4 weeks, and at that point we go on > and test > submissions too, while having Tx 0.3 as a backup solution. > > Some of the advantages of this approach is that using the statistics > from Tx > 0.5-devel does not even require hook-up with FAS (only submissions > require > authentication), we have a smoother upgrade path for Django/v0.5 and > we have a > codebase we know inside-out to build/invest on. First of all, setting up a test-instance of Transifex 0.5alpha is a good start, so a big +1 from me. You should probably think of a migration script for transferring the data as well. I would suggest [1] as a good starting point for this, as it is based on Django and gets you quickly up and running. That said, I have a number of concerns with this approach. Just a few weeks back you noted that 0.5 wouldn't be ready in time for F11, and that a good approach would be to migrate to the new Django-based Damned Lies for F11. Hence, I have spent roughly a week worth of development on this now, and I am announcing a public test period for this by the end of this week. The changes we have made to the upstream Gnome version include Fedora-theming (similar to the existing instance), FAS authentication for translators in the cvsl10n group, proper VCS locking and improvements to the way vcs sandboxes are managed, and now the last bit involves support for publican statistics (for e.g. release notes and selinux-guide). However, I have no issue with throwing that work away if we can demonstrate that Tx 0.5 will serve the needs of the L10N project better in the given time-frame. My main concern is the translators and their work flow, and for F11 we owe translators a less crap system than what we've been using for the last two releases. My secondary concern is maintainability, and the core of my changes to DL has been ensuring that it doesn't fail as often, and providing better information when it fails. Some of the benefits with the new Django-based DL: - Translation teams can be better organized (Does Tx even have team pages?) - Translators can indicate that they are working on a specific file - Options of using a Translator->Reviewer->Committer work flow, I suspect linking up the actual commit functionality (migrating it from Tx 03 to DL) is less than a day's work. - Django based DL has been in production upstream (Gnome L10N) for more than 3 months So the gist of my message is that we should first look at the how the translation work flow changes by using these two tools. As I see it, we have four options: 1) Tx 0.5 for stats, Tx 0.5 for commits (not implemented yet) 2) Tx 0.5 for stats, Tx 0.3 for commits 3) DjL for stats, Tx 0.3 for commits 4) DjL for stants, DjL for commits (not implemented yet) So far I'm a few days away from completing (3), and should also be able to get (4) done by early next week. If I can be convinced of a clear roadmap for (1) I'd be happy to help out with that, provided I can see the benefit to the translators with this approach. However, I am a bit afraid that option (2) might hurt Tx more than it gains in the long run. Why not focus on getting Tx 0.5 production ready and in shape to become a great translation platform, rather than simply rushing it in in time for F11? Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but *it is* great to finally see a test instance of Django-based Tx, so don't get me wrong, and I'm guessing a test instance of both systems will make it easier for us to find the best approach for F11 L10N. I know there have been plans of merging the Django-based Tx with DL as well, perhaps this might be a way of developing a migration-path in that direction as well, as I'm worried that the longer these applications stay separate with active development on both sides, the harder it's going to be to get e.g. Tx accepted for use in Gnome. cheers, asgeir [1] https://fedorahosted.org/damned-lies-fedora/browser/stats/management/comman…

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

infrastructure February 2009