XSF Discussion - 2011-12-14

  1. dwd

    A little less than half an hour to go.

  2. stpeter


  3. stpeter is on a conference call so not really paying attention here at the moment

  4. lurker11542

    stpeter tests from speeqe.com

  5. stpeter

    well, that works, but it seems that Chris can't access speeqe.com either

  6. dwd


  7. stpeter

    text to speech? ;-)

  8. dwd

    The only thing I wondered was whether we could setup a 1-1 => MUC relay fast enough.

  9. bear is slow this morning

  10. bear

    what do you mean by 1-1

  11. bear


  12. stpeter tries to use the gmail web interface for muc and fails utterly

  13. dwd

    bear, One to one chat.

  14. bear


  15. bear

    thought that was it but the => MUC part was making my post-sick brain all wonky

  16. dwd

    So, 8 minutes to go and we have 3/5 board folk and one apology.

  17. Florian

    16:30 meeting?

  18. dwd

    Florian, Yep.

  19. dwd


  20. dwd

    (For those wot 'ave forgot)

  21. Florian

    do we have an etherpad?

  22. dwd

    Florian, Do we want one?

  23. Florian

    it's quite nice to get the minutes ready

  24. bear considers that to be the note takers option

  25. dwd

    Florian, You realise you're getting dangerously close to offering to do the minutes this week?

  26. Florian shuts up

  27. Florian

    I killed our core server this morning

  28. stpeter


  29. stpeter

    that's our permanent room

  30. Florian

    by running aptitude without realizing it was removing nearly all packages

  31. bear


  32. dwd

    Yay, it's Ashley!

  33. dwd

    So we are complete, modulo Chris's apology.

  34. bear

    I did that once with RHEL 6 - removed the core package that allows yum to update itself

  35. Florian


  36. Ashley


  37. stpeter

    we need a muc to chat bot

  38. stpeter

    that way we could patch people in

  39. dwd


  40. dwd

    So, I declare us in session.

  41. stpeter

    http://code.matthewwild.co.uk/riddim/ here I come :)

  42. dwd

    So, first item is Athena - do we have sufficient item folk to offer advice on what they'd like to do?

  43. dwd

    Kev, stpeter - I believe this is your bag. What are our options for Athena, and what needs to happen as a priority?

  44. Florian puts Flosoft.biz hat on

  45. dwd looks meaningfully across the office at Kev, in the hope he'll reply.

  46. Florian

    we can offer an upgrade to ds0039 (i.e. a better box)

  47. stpeter

    BTW I am manually copying text from this room over to Chris

  48. Kev

    I think the plan was to start mirroring stuff onto ds0039.

  49. dwd

    stpeter, Ah, yes. I should really have thought of that.

  50. Kev

    This was dependent upon someone working out database replication for us.

  51. Florian

    Processor Intel Bi XeonE54052x 4x 2.00 GHz Architecture 64 bits NIC GigaEthernet Memory 16 GB Disks 2x 750GB RAID Soft 0/1 VT Instructions

  52. stpeter

    for the record, ds0039 is a Flosoft machine

  53. bear

    stpeter - screen share with chris?

  54. Florian

    right. Flosoft.biz would be willing to replace that machine with the configuration mentioned above. ds0039 has no RAID.

  55. dwd

    bear, I'm sure if he could screen share he could do proper XMPP.

  56. Kev

    I quite like the idea of fixing up athena (either by replacement of disk or box).

  57. Florian puts his board hat on again

  58. stpeter

    bear: this will work for now -- I think I'll do some riddim bot hacking over the holidays

  59. Kev

    I'm not entirely sure I can come up with a convincing reason not to migrate athena over to the offered Flosoft machine, off the top of my head.

  60. bear was just offering

  61. stpeter

    Kev: I don't see a good reason

  62. Florian

    the problem I see with ds0039, it has no RAID

  63. bear

    +1 to migrate to flosoft: it gives us a recent hardware base and RAID

  64. dwd

    Kev, What's your unconvincing reasons?

  65. Florian

    so I would say ds0039 is bad, but Flosoft.biz can replace ds0039 with the dual CPU box above, which does have software RAID

  66. stpeter

    we've had all the machines in Iowa so that they're all in one place, Jer could check out the hardware if needed, etc.

  67. Kev

    dwd: I quite like having stuff all in Iowa.

  68. dwd

    "stuff" == our data?

  69. Kev

    No, the servers.

  70. stpeter

    Kev: yeah, but that means we need to maintain machines -- isn't that kind of old-fashioned these days?

  71. dwd

    Well, having your eggs all in one basket does make them more convenient to carry.

  72. Kev

    stpeter: Some of us are old fashioned. Not all of us are trendy Lua coders like you.

  73. stpeter

    and it also means that we have problems if there are connectivity issues

  74. Florian


  75. Kev

    But the original suggestion was that we had the main box in the bunker, and then mirrored that over to ds0039.

  76. Ashley

    is there any reason to consider EC2 or others of that ilk?

  77. stpeter

    Kev: I'm talking about changing my website back to server-side includes :P

  78. Kev

    Which seem like a pretty sensible solution to the network failure issue.

  79. Kev

    Ashley: None that I can think of.

  80. dwd

    Does that need MySQL expertise to figure out how to keep them in sync properly?

  81. Florian

    the question is: Do we really need to be syncing stuff?

  82. Kev

    dwd: Either that, or we set up a cunning reverse proxy thing.

  83. Florian

    i.e. is there a point in putting in that much effort for a single site?

  84. dwd

    Do we have, or can we arrange, MySQL expertise?

  85. bear

    syncing and all that seems overkill for such a basic setup that xsf has

  86. Florian

    Master-Master replication with MySQL is annoying

  87. dwd

    Florian, I think it looks really bad when our site is down.

  88. Kev

    Florian: I don't know. It's jolly inconvenient when the site is down.

  89. Florian

    bear: I agree

  90. stpeter

    dwd: agreed, for sure

  91. bear

    if the urge to keep servers with physical access is that great then iowa is the only option as anything else incurs fully managed server costs

  92. Kev

    bear: Well, yes, but a previous Board decided we wanted a database driven site and not the nice plain-text one we had before.

  93. Florian

    dwd / Kev: definitely. But I'm sure the site will be quite reliable on a single server

  94. Florian

    as the hardware / network is covered by the SLA

  95. dwd

    Florian, So question - I'm happy to assume that flosoft's bandwidth is perfect; what happens if ds0039++ drops?

  96. Florian

    if it drops, someone in the DC will take a look at it and bring it back up

  97. bear

    to answer the original mysql question - a once an hour master/slave setup is very simple to configure (especially if the mirror is readonly)

  98. stpeter

    I'd be fine with that

  99. stpeter

    that = website(s?) at Flosoft

  100. Florian

    I don't think it's worth spending a lot of time on a HA setup for an edge case (the website isn't mission critical)

  101. stpeter

    Florian: +`1

  102. dwd

    Florian, What does Flosoft.biz want in compensation? (ie, money, sponsorship, etc)?

  103. Kev

    Florian: Actually, I'd argue the website is the only mission critical thing!

  104. stpeter

    Kev: heh

  105. dwd

    Kev, I'd agree.

  106. Kev

    The XSF's mission being to shove out these standards things.

  107. Florian

    dwd: Sponsorship

  108. dwd

    Florian, In any particular form?

  109. Florian

    well, what's the level for ± 1200€

  110. bear

    200pt sponsor text on each page?

  111. stpeter

    Kev: you have a point

  112. dwd

    stpeter, Well, he's certainly sharp.

  113. bear waves the "joke" flag in case it wasn't obvious

  114. stpeter

    I'll note that the XSF does have money in the bank and could afford to purchase a new machine to replace athena

  115. bear

    if flosoft is offering a server in exchange for sponsorship status - I like that idea so the cash can go towards other items

  116. dwd

    Florian, Actually, i don't know what levels there are, really.

  117. Florian


  118. Florian

    Silver or Gold

  119. stpeter

    naturally, another approach (I hate to say this) is to go back to a static website so that it's easier to replicate across servers

  120. dwd

    Florian, OK. Do you reckon some kind of HA could be sorted for a Gold sponsorship?

  121. bear

    to make sure I have this clear in my head... the option would be to have primary on flosoft with iowa server being the backup/utility server?

  122. Florian

    we could set up replication to Iowa

  123. dwd

    bear, Well, the Board is not going to make technical decisions.

  124. Florian

    but not a second server

  125. Florian

    i.e. Flosoft.biz would be happy to help setting up failover mechanisms to external hardware

  126. bear

    not even thinking on *how* - just asking what the roles would be

  127. dwd

    bear, The Board can, however, give the item authorization to go various routes.

  128. dwd


  129. Florian

    so technically I'm thinking something like MySQL replication + webserver on another machine in Iowa

  130. dwd

    So, I think we have those options now - so can we make a decision on whether we could in principle accept Flosoft's offer? (Should the item want it)

  131. dwd

    I'm +1 on this, incidentally.

  132. Florian

    I'd like to abstain from this vote as I'm biased.

  133. bear

    seeing the pushback on not talking specifics, then we can only vote on putting the choice to the iteam and getting their feedback

  134. Kev

    I think we should have at least Jonathan's input before deciding.

  135. bear is +1 to this

  136. dwd

    bear, If the item want to go the Flosoft route, I don't see a need for them to come back to us.

  137. Kev

    Given that he's largely responsible for 'machine' admin.

  138. stpeter

    Kev: +1 to getting Jonathan's input

  139. dwd

    Kev, Right. But that's fine. The iteam can decide to use whatever options we're authorizing here.

  140. dwd

    Ashley, You happy in principle with Flosoft getting sponsorship in exchange for webserver?

  141. Ashley


  142. stpeter

    BTW, the other major infrastructure that the XSF runs is atlas = all the mailing lists (and we also use athena for running the muc.xmpp.org chatrooms)

  143. stpeter

    Chris says: " if it's flobiz's offer we are voting on, I think I am fine with this"

  144. dwd


  145. dwd

    So the other option is to buy a new machine - that is, a replacement Athena.

  146. stpeter

    BTW, I receive offers of help on occasion from random ISPs and hosting providers and such -- I should keep better track of those

  147. stpeter

    dwd: right

  148. stpeter

    dwd: and atlas won't last forever, either

  149. stpeter

    would we be comfortable hosting both email and web and muc.xmpp.org on the same machine?

  150. Kev

    I was pondering that.

  151. stpeter

    that's probably an iteam discussion item

  152. dwd

    stpeter, Right, that's one for iteam.

  153. Kev

    We've traditionally limited access to the mail machine much more than to the others.

  154. bear

    the server that flosoft is offering can handle all of that

  155. stpeter

    Kev: right

  156. Florian


  157. stpeter

    ok my other conference call is finished so I have more cycles

  158. Florian

    16GB of RAM and 2x 4 Core CPUs

  159. dwd

    My gut feeling is that machines which handle mail and XMPP should probably stay in Iowa.

  160. dwd

    I'm not sure I can construct and argument as to why.

  161. stpeter


  162. Florian


  163. bear

    status quo is hard to shift

  164. Florian

    I'd say that is something for Iteam to discuss anyways

  165. stpeter

    I think I'd be comfortable with putting mail and xmpp (which is limited) on the same machine

  166. stpeter

    Florian: agreed

  167. stpeter

    or we can discuss on the members@ list

  168. Florian

    so we're authorizing: - A Flosoft.biz sponsored machine - Buying a new machine

  169. dwd

    So if we're to buy a new machine for Athena, and possible Atlas as well, what costs are we looking at, and is this within the scope of the XSF's current cash reserves?

  170. stpeter

    which might attract more people to help with infrastructure issues

  171. dwd

    stpeter, The final decision remains with the iteam, though, I feel.

  172. Kev

    Atlas is, as far as I'm aware, very low requirement.

  173. stpeter

    dwd: that leads into your next agenda item :)

  174. Kev

    In fact, given the age of the various boxes, all the requirements are fairly low.

  175. stpeter

    dwd: "Teams, SIGs, and other constructs "

  176. stpeter

    KEv: yes

  177. dwd

    It does. We're also running wildly over. :-)

  178. stpeter

    dwd: indeed

  179. dwd

    OK. So I think we ask the iteam to scope out hardware costs and come back to us, OK?

  180. stpeter

    I think so, yes

  181. bear


  182. dwd

    OK, so next item...

  183. Kev

    Board Chair to chase iteam, then.

  184. Florian


  185. dwd

    Kev, Well, walk firmly after them anyway.

  186. dwd

    "Teams, SIGs and other constructs".

  187. dwd

    So a team is defined as beign XSF members only.

  188. dwd

    Whereas a SIG is open to all-comers.

  189. bear

    IMO, the only team we need like that is iTeam

  190. stpeter

    per they Bylaws, yes

  191. stpeter


  192. dwd

    We've got both a communications team and a tech-review team, and the iteam.

  193. stpeter should add a table of contents to that page

  194. dwd

    Are there any others?

  195. stpeter


  196. Kev

    I'm not convinced that we have a communications team or a tech review team in anything other than name.

  197. stpeter

    Kev: correct

  198. dwd

    Well, nor me.

  199. stpeter

    Kev: and I am not convinced that we need them

  200. bear agrees

  201. Florian


  202. stpeter

    I think that everyone can (and many should) be helping with technical reviews, but that's what the standards@xmpp.org list is for

  203. bear

    the only structure I could see to SIGs is a tech council or board member being on "hook" for any SIGs

  204. dwd

    OK. So do we need to try and motivate people to do a "communications SIG", so we can push news and exciting stuff from any sources?

  205. stpeter

    and communications can happen easily because many people have access to the website to make changes (although few do) -- however, there's more to communication than the website, I suppose, with all the social networking stuff we could do

  206. stpeter

    BTW Chris has another meeting to go to

  207. bear

    I would love to create a little dashboard to allow for pushing to the various social streams

  208. dwd

    OK, that's fine. We're overrunning, anyway.

  209. dwd

    I'm assuming everyone is happy keeping the iteam as a formal team (assuming it is one).

  210. Florian

    why not just have an open mailinglist

  211. Florian

    where people can post ready articles to?

  212. dwd

    Florian, Yeah, that is, in effect, a SIG.

  213. stpeter

    Florian: I just shut down the news@jabber.org list :)

  214. Florian

    that existed?

  215. stpeter


  216. stpeter

    from 1999 on

  217. Florian

    well, something like: submit@xmpp.org

  218. bear

    people can post to members list with subject line marker [news] or something

  219. stpeter

    but we haven't used it in ages

  220. Florian

    or that

  221. stpeter

    bear: yeah

  222. dwd

    bear, That restricts it to only members, though.

  223. bear

    for xsf comm output - I don't mind it being members only

  224. bear

    it's communication *from* xsf

  225. bear

    not about

  226. stpeter


  227. dwd

    bear, Is it? The comm team used to produce newsletters about XMPP.

  228. stpeter

    dwd: really?

  229. dwd

    stpeter, Did it not?

  230. stpeter

    we did have the "Jabber Journal" back in the old days

  231. Kev

    Nyco used to do roundups, yes.

  232. bear

    their was a blog posting that used to be done regularly - the roundups

  233. stpeter

    ah true

  234. stpeter

    I never saw those as "newsletters" :)

  235. stpeter

    thus the disconnect

  236. dwd

    Right, sorry, I forgot the name.

  237. bear

    I'm feeling that if we get pushback from the community that it's hard to post notices about xmpp from non-members we can adjust

  238. dwd

    I don't think we'd get that pushback. We're not getting anything much at the moment, after all.

  239. bear

    I just get all squeamish about the xsf blog being available for anyone to push text to

  240. Ashley

    would something like having a reddit clone for ppl to post news articles be interesting?

  241. Kev

    Ashley: I don't understand the concept.

  242. stpeter

    let's go with bear's suggestion as a start -- in any case, it can't hurt AFAICS

  243. dwd

    But in any case, we're reasonably sure that the communications team and the tech-review team can be formally disbanded?

  244. bear

    sounds like something the "social media" SIG can handle and make recommendations :)

  245. Ashley

    i'm assuming we're talking about articles that might exist somewhere on a public URL

  246. bear invites Ashley to help form the SocialSIG with him

  247. Kev

    Ashley: Ah, I think we generally push 'unique' content.

  248. Ashley

    sure, that'd be fun bear!

  249. Kev

    Finding other stuff people have written sounds interesting.

  250. bear

    +1 to disbanding the formal comm and tech teams

  251. stpeter

    (just to back up, it appears we have agreement that the Technical Review Team was a nice idea but hasn't panned out -- shall we propose on the members@ list to disband that one?)

  252. stpeter


  253. stpeter

    bear: I think that's reasonable

  254. dwd

    Florian, ?

  255. Ashley

    reddit is a digg clone

  256. stpeter

    we can always start them again if needed / desired, but I don't see a need for them

  257. Florian


  258. dwd

    Ashley, ?

  259. Florian


  260. Ashley

    sorry, backing up and reading :)

  261. Florian

    no more formal teams

  262. Ashley

    ah +1

  263. dwd


  264. bear

    (well, iteam still remains as formal)?

  265. Kev

    Florian: I don't think the vote was for *all* teams?

  266. Florian

    not all, no :)

  267. Florian

    the tech and comm team

  268. dwd

    So, we'll scuttle to the next item...

  269. Ashley

    for example, here's ycombinators implementation of reddit: http://news.ycombinator.com/

  270. dwd

    Do we want either an Interop SIG or a FOSDEM Team?

  271. stpeter


  272. Florian

    do we need one?

  273. Florian

    I would say, let's allow teams if there are people for it

  274. stpeter

    FOSDEM just happens, doesn't it?

  275. stpeter

    Interop is a possibility, but we might want to just work on some code there first and we do have the interop@ email list

  276. Florian


  277. dwd

    stpeter, I think an "Interop SIG" is identical to the interop mailing list, except that it gets some XSF authority.

  278. stpeter

    dwd: FWIW yes

  279. dwd

    stpeter, And as for FOSDEM, we're trying to do quite a lot this year, and I think putting together a formal, if short-lived, team might help get some focus on that.

  280. bear

    +1 to Interop SIG and FOSDEM SIG - the latter happens organically it seems even if we don't "bless" it

  281. Florian


  282. dwd

    bear, Note I proposed a FOSDEM *team* - as in, members only.

  283. bear

    sorry - got carried away with the urge to type SIG

  284. dwd

    bear, Rather than allowing an open free-for-all, basically.

  285. bear amends +1 to be for suggested breakdown

  286. stpeter

    dwd: it could be a standing team that gets active once a year -- we might want to have a separate OSCON team if we think that's important

  287. bear

    Events Team

  288. Florian

    let's start with a FOSDEM Team

  289. Florian

    and see how it goes :)

  290. dwd

    stpeter, I think a team that's dormant for 10 months of the year is the moral equivalent of a short-lived team, but yes, we can deal with that as we reach it.

  291. stpeter is unconvinced that we need an events team since we can just coordinate on the members@ list

  292. dwd

    stpeter, It's useful having people to explicitly kick.

  293. stpeter


  294. bear

    I need to run to a different meeting

  295. dwd

    Ashley, Any opinion? If not, we can take this one to the list.

  296. Ashley

    i don't feel particularly strongly either way. i do however agree with dwd's point

  297. Ashley

    i think need some sort of official POC or two for the events

  298. dwd

    OK, let's leave this to another time, then, if bear's going. We're still quorate for now, we'll discuss on the list.

  299. dwd

    Sorry. Unclear.

  300. dwd

    We're still quorate for now, however, we'll discuss on the list.

  301. bear


  302. Florian


  303. dwd

    OK, so I shall propose a motion to adjourn.

  304. Ashley


  305. Florian


  306. bear seconds

  307. bear

    next meeting?

  308. dwd

    Same bat-time, same bat-channel.

  309. bear


  310. stpeter

    does that mean next Wednesday?

  311. dwd

    It does.

  312. Florian


  313. bear flees for much more boring but facetime required meeting

  314. dwd

    Except we have to call it Bat-Wednesday.

  315. stpeter

    ok, I will add it to the calendar

  316. dwd


  317. dwd

    Florian, You writing up the minutes, then?

  318. stpeter

    I did some editing at http://typewith.me/xsf but was doing too many things at once :(

  319. Florian

    I can, I've got some notes on typewith.me

  320. Florian

    but I need to run out for a dinner

  321. Florian

    will send later tonight if that's ok

  322. stpeter


  323. stpeter

    I'll do some editing there as well

  324. stpeter


  325. stpeter

    calendar updated

  326. stpeter

    http://typewith.me/xsf updated

  327. stpeter

    I need to run an errand, bbiab

  328. dwd

    I can do them tomorrow, actually, I was only winding Florian up. :-)

  329. stpeter


  330. stpeter

    anyway, bbiab