So now that fpserv no longer hosts the wiki... We may be able to re-evaluate the people.fedoraproject.org and developers.fedoraproject.org setup. This machine is at Duke and Seth is on board (he suggested it). I'd still like to send a copy of the CVS off site to this box for safe keeping but it would allow us for plenty of leg room. This is probably going to be a long discussion (as it should be) but I'll get started.
people.fedoraproject.org: For Fedora contributors[1] only, no exceptions. 50M quota, strictly enforced. Static content only sftp access http access Fedora related content only. (We will passively police) No expectation of privacy Won't take much to get banned from p.fp.o username.people.fedoraproject.org (should be trivial to setup)
developers.fedoraproject.org For the more high-level people, will require full approval of the infrastructure team. For those that don't make it I'll send them a note telling them no and explaining why if there is a reason. (This if for the jkatz, thl's, abadger1999 and dgilmore's of our group) 200M quota, manually enforced (email notifications) Static content and basic scripting, TurboGears, python, php, perl, etc. cronjobs (this may be a bad idea) sftp http/https shell / ssh no expectations of privacy Local apps (like running their own mysql db's and such, as long as it's within the quota) username.dev.fedoraproject.org (should be trivial to setup) We will help meet these peoples needs but won't go too far out of the way (like installing multiple versions of python) ** Not for critical apps **
The idea here is that this should be a very hands off process for our team. We'll help the developers with things but if we don't meet their needs, they'll have to go somewhere else, this is a convenience thing. The people.fp.o site will be completely hands off, we have to find a scriptable way to determine who belongs in people. Anyway, what do you think?
-Mike
[1] Contributor. Here are a few possible definitions of contributor:
CLA: Users who have signed the CLA (I consider this to be the general public) Sponsored: Users who have been sponsored by someone for their team. Committers: People who actually have commit access to the CVS (Doc's team, Extras, etc)
I vote for "sponsored"
Mike McGrath (mmcgrath@redhat.com) said:
The idea here is that this should be a very hands off process for our team. We'll help the developers with things but if we don't meet their needs, they'll have to go somewhere else, this is a convenience thing. The people.fp.o site will be completely hands off, we have to find a scriptable way to determine who belongs in people. Anyway, what do you think?
I don't suppose you could have a <username>.fedoraproject.org that goes to the developer/user backend depending on the user status?
Bill
Bill Nottingham wrote:
I don't suppose you could have a <username>.fedoraproject.org that goes to the developer/user backend depending on the user status?
Bill
I remember my concern with this... 1) automating stuff directly under fp.o and 2) worries about people creating a username "admins" and thus getting "admins.fedoraproject.org"
-Mike
Mike,
What will be the main differences between developers.fp.o in DUKE (fpserv) and the current xen (publicX or testX) architecture that we have in PHX?
Paulo
On 2/23/07, Mike McGrath mmcgrath@redhat.com wrote:
Bill Nottingham wrote:
I don't suppose you could have a <username>.fedoraproject.org that goes to the developer/user backend depending on the user status?
Bill
I remember my concern with this... 1) automating stuff directly under fp.o and 2) worries about people creating a username "admins" and thus getting "admins.fedoraproject.org"
-Mike
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
Paulo Santos wrote:
Mike,
What will be the main differences between developers.fp.o in DUKE (fpserv) and the current xen (publicX or testX) architecture that we have in PHX?
Dedication, the xen machines are completely dedicated resources that the users can do anything with. The developers site will be more shared and self-sustained. Think of the dev site as being less of a big deal to get then the xen boxes, also the Xen boxes expire after a certain amount of time so they can be freed up for other uses.
-Mike
On Feb 23, 2007, at 16:27 , Mike McGrath wrote:
Bill Nottingham wrote:
I don't suppose you could have a <username>.fedoraproject.org that goes to the developer/user backend depending on the user status?
Bill
I remember my concern with this... 1) automating stuff directly under fp.o
Never underestimate what you can do with wildcard DNS :-)
- worries about people creating a username "admins" and thus
getting "admins.fedoraproject.org"
You're on your own on this one :)
Best, -- Elliot
Never underestimate what you can do with wildcard DNS :-)
Heh.
- worries about people creating a username "admins" and thus getting
"admins.fedoraproject.org"
You're on your own on this one :)
Pre-existing domains take precedence over wildcard.
Someone could also setup asshats.fedoraproject.org too. Just something to ponder.
Matthew Galgoci wrote:
Never underestimate what you can do with wildcard DNS :-)
Heh.
- worries about people creating a username "admins" and thus getting
"admins.fedoraproject.org"
You're on your own on this one :)
Pre-existing domains take precedence over wildcard.
Someone could also setup asshats.fedoraproject.org too. Just something to ponder.
Have we considered that *.fedoraproject.org is precious enough that we don't want arbitrary names there?
Even if users don't do something malicious or stupid, it is possible that somebody would create a name that we will want to use for a service later.
If we really want this, why not do username@fedorasomethingelse.org instead?
Warren Togami wtogami@redhat.com
Once upon a time Wednesday 28 February 2007, Warren Togami wrote:
Matthew Galgoci wrote:
Never underestimate what you can do with wildcard DNS :-)
Heh.
- worries about people creating a username "admins" and thus getting
"admins.fedoraproject.org"
You're on your own on this one :)
Pre-existing domains take precedence over wildcard.
Someone could also setup asshats.fedoraproject.org too. Just something to ponder.
Have we considered that *.fedoraproject.org is precious enough that we don't want arbitrary names there?
Even if users don't do something malicious or stupid, it is possible that somebody would create a name that we will want to use for a service later.
If we really want this, why not do username@fedorasomethingelse.org instead?
I brought fedorapeople.org and will donate it to fedora. So we have that to use. it will let us keep them separate.
Dennis
Dennis Gilmore wrote:
I brought fedorapeople.org and will donate it to fedora. So we have that to use. it will let us keep them separate.
Dennis
I'm going to bump this project up in priority a bit, hopefully will have something over the next couple of weeks. Anyone want to be project manager? If not it'll just appear magically sometime soon :-) Dennis, thanks for the purchase BTW, you rock.
-Mike
Mike McGrath wrote:
Dennis Gilmore wrote:
I brought fedorapeople.org and will donate it to fedora. So we have that to use. it will let us keep them separate.
Dennis
I'm going to bump this project up in priority a bit, hopefully will have something over the next couple of weeks. Anyone want to be project manager? If not it'll just appear magically sometime soon :-) Dennis, thanks for the purchase BTW, you rock.
I had another idea for people.fedoraproject.org that would make it more difficult to just become public hosting. Give each team a group quota. Its self policing except for when the group grows, their space should grow. But it would require that people have a sponsor to get space, which would help prevent abuse. We could use this exclusively or mix it. Just a thought.
-Mike
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org