Subject: postgresql.org mail infrastructure

From: "Dave Page" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 16:07:13 +0000

The postgresql.org mail infrastructure is currently deeply intertwined
with the hub.org system. This makes it difficult for the 2 non-hub.org
people who have access to manage the systems, and means that any
problems with hub.org affect us, and any problems caused by us will
affect hub.org customers.

I propose that we build a replacement mail system, tailored to our
needs. This would be built on our existing FreeBSD infrastructure and
would be managed by members of the existing sysadmin team including
myself, Magnus, Stefan and Marc. Further, it has been suggested that
OmniTI may be able to offer assistance.

Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such
a project?

-- 
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK Ltd: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PostgreSQL UK 2008 Conference: http://www.postgresql.org.uk

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 09:10:58 -0700

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 16:07:13 +0000

> Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such

+1. I will donate any time required (and hardware if needed).

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

-- 
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ 
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director |  PostgreSQL political pundit

---

From: Magnus Hagander <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:15:53 +0100

> Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such

+1

//Magnus

---

From: Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:20:31 +0100

> Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such

+1 for an own PostgreSQL mail infrastructure.

If you need a helping hand, please let me know.

Kind regards

-- 
				Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum
German PostgreSQL User Group
European PostgreSQL User Group - Board of Directors

---

From: Guillaume Lelarge <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:34:19 +0100

Dave Page a écrit :
> [...]

+1 for our own mail infrastructure.

-- 
Guillaume.
  http://www.postgresqlfr.org
  http://dalibo.com

---

From: Alvaro Herrera <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:39:34 -0300

> Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such

+1 to the project -- assuming that it means a change of infrastructure
and not necessarily of tools.  I, for one, would oppose changing Mj2 for
Mailman, for instance.  (However, whether we use Sendmail or Postfix or
something else entirely I don't care ...)

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:48:27 -0700

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:39:34 -0300
Alvaro Herrera <[email-masked]> wrote:
 
> and not necessarily of tools.  I, for one, would oppose changing Mj2
> for Mailman, for instance.  (However, whether we use Sendmail or
> Postfix or something else entirely I don't care ...)

Actually this is a good point. We really should define requirements as
part of this, let's not just do it wholesale. Here are a couple:

 * Software must be open source?
 * Environment must be managed by the community
 * Attempt to have admins in each of the following timezones
   EST
   PST
   CET
   * I believe with those three we have 24x7 coverage
 * FreeBSD is OS?

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake 

- -- 
The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ 
PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/
United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

---

From: "Dave Page" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:53:31 +0000

On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Joshua D. Drake <[email-masked]> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>

Please stick to the point of this thread.

---

From: Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 19:02:22 +0100

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:48:27 -0700 Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> part of this, let's not just do it wholesale.

I'm first for checking, if we find an agreement about either creating a
new mail infrastructure, stabilizing the current situation or (which i
would find pity) doing nothing at all.

The next step, if any, would be to find out, if we need a new domain.
Because in case of a new domain we have a lot more problems to solve
than just the question which software to use.

>  * Environment must be managed by the community

I would say, this question is implicated. If we vote for a new mail
infrastructure, this surely not means to give away this infrastructure
into the hands of another company, or? Or?

>  * Attempt to have admins in each of the following timezones

That's a job for the sysadmin team, not to discuss here. If we need
more helping hands in this team, this can be discussed and solved in
another thread.

>  * FreeBSD is OS?

Same thing -> sysadmin team.

So let's stay on topic. If we have a decision we can create other
mail threads and discuss the details.

Thank you & kind regards

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 15:10:20 -0400 (EDT)

> something else entirely I don't care ...)

Agreed.  I think the proposal is to move the FreeBSD jails in their
entirety to servers that a community team can manage.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <[email-masked]>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

---

From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 20:32:45 +0100

> affect hub.org customers.

yeah - I think this fact adds quite some complexity to the whole system 
- and keeping things simple is quite often a really good concept.

> Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such

well such a project would be a fairly large undertaking and needs to be 
planned properly - but +1 on the idea of decoupling the hub.org 
infrastructure from the postgresql.org on at least a logical (ie 
seperate jails) level.

Stefan

---

From: "Joshua D. Drake" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 12:48:52 -0700

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:53:31 +0000
"Dave Page" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> >  > +1 to the project -- assuming that it means a change of
> >  > infrastructure and not necessarily of tools.  I, for one, would
> >  > oppose changing Mj2 for Mailman, for instance.  (However,
> >  > whether we use Sendmail or Postfix or something else entirely I
> >  > don't care ...)
> >
> >  Actually this is a good point. We really should define
> > requirements as part of this, let's not just do it wholesale. Here
> > are a couple:
> >

Sorry I wasn't trying to diverge.

Joshua D. Drake 

- --

---

From: Devrim GÜNDÜZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:09:16 -0700

Hi,

> Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such

+1.
-- 
Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:00:33 -0300 (ADT)

Please note that as much as Bruce seems to be misguided into thinking this 
has something to do with the WWW setup, it isn't ... changes in this 
infrastructure will be (and is being) discussed on -core, specifically 
between Tom, Dave and myself ...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . [email-masked]                              MSN . [email-masked]
Yahoo . yscrappy               Skype: hub.org        ICQ . 7615664

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:07:45 -0400 (EDT)

> between Tom, Dave and myself ...

People ask about all infrastructure issues on this list.  If there is an
email problem, historically we have talked about it here.

Do you want to set this list to moderated like Josh Berkus did with
advocacy?  (That didn't work out to well, as I remember).  You want to
set up a move-the-infrastructure email list?  (That didn't work out well
either.)

"Don't like the message, stop them from communicating."  I thought we
learned from the advocacy debacle.

It is true we are discussing this on core too but shouldn't stop
discussion here.

---

From: "Dave Page" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 21:13:26 +0000

>  between Tom, Dave and myself ...

I would argue that it's a sysadmin team issue to resolve (the lead
people in that group being you, me, Stefan and Magnus), however, Bruce
is correct in that the public side of the sysadmin/infrastructure work
does generally end up being discussed on this list.

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:31:39 -0300 (ADT)

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Dave Page wrote:

> people in that group being you, me, Stefan and Magnus)

it would be an easy argument to make too ...

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:52:45 -0300 (ADT)

Just a short top-post here ... as I mentioned before, Dave/Tom/I have been 
discussing this issue on -core, with it degenerating to 'Dave/I' ... we 
have a plan to move forward on this based on discussions that actually 
happened a couple of weeks ago as a percursor to this ...

Dave/I will be posting a summary of our scheduale/plan to sysadmins later 
this evening, as this is an infrastructure, not WWW, issue ...

Thank you ...

----

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> Sent via pgsql-www mailing list ([email-masked])
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www
>

---

From: Magnus Hagander <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 23:09:14 +0100

Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> 
> Just a short top-post here ... as I mentioned before, Dave/Tom/I have 
> been discussing this issue on -core, with it degenerating to 'Dave/I' 
> ... we have a plan to move forward on this based on discussions that 
> actually happened a couple of weeks ago as a percursor to this ...
> 
> Dave/I will be posting a summary of our scheduale/plan to sysadmins 
> later this evening, as this is an infrastructure, not WWW, issue ...
> 
> Thank you ...

Thanks Marc! I appreciate seeing this move forward!

//Magnus

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 19:43:19 -0300 (ADT)

> Thanks Marc! I appreciate seeing this move forward!

NP ... I hadn't even realized that our previous talks on this *had* 
stalled, but I suspect Bruce missed that thread and jump'd in between us 
having an agreed on target, and actually implementing it ...

It happens.

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 18:49:56 -0400 (EDT)

> having an agreed on target, and actually implementing it ...

Frankly, I don't care what the outcome of this is as long as other
people feel we are moving forward.

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 19:56:10 -0300 (ADT)

> people feel we are moving forward.

Well, considering that Magnus was the one (if I recall correctly) was the 
one that was advocating the direction that we had decided to take, and he 
wasn't doing much pushing (which I know he will do if it is taking too 
long), I suspect that you are about the only one feeling impatient with 
how fast this was going ...

---

From: Bruce Momjian <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 19:39:42 -0400 (EDT)

> how fast this was going ...

After out outage this week, with few people able to help, many of
us were frustrated.

---

From: David Fetter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 19:34:24 -0700

On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 04:07:13PM +0000, Dave Page wrote:
> The postgresql.org mail infrastructure is currently deeply
> intertwined with the hub.org system. This makes it difficult for the
> 2 non-hub.org people who have access to manage the systems, and
> means that any problems with hub.org affect us, and any problems
> caused by us will affect hub.org customers.
> 
> needs. This would be built on our existing FreeBSD infrastructure
> and would be managed by members of the existing sysadmin team
> including myself, Magnus, Stefan and Marc. Further, it has been
> suggested that OmniTI may be able to offer assistance.
> 
> Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with
> such a project?

+1 for progressing.

Cheers,
David
-- 
David Fetter <[email-masked]> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: [email-masked]

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

---

From: Magnus Hagander <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 22:33:13 +0100

Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Well, considering that Magnus was the one (if I recall correctly) was 
> the one that was advocating the direction that we had decided to take, 
> and he wasn't doing much pushing (which I know he will do if it is 
> taking too long), I suspect that you are about the only one feeling 
> impatient with how fast this was going ...

To be fair, the reason I stopped pushing was that I didn't expect it to 
have any effect. It's not like it's had it before.

But that was for getting it started. once it's started and we're in 
agreement that things should be done, we should be sure to plan it out 
properly before we actually start pulling things apart, of course! Just 
so things don't stall...

//Magnus

---

From: damien clochard <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 17:38:19 +0100

+1

-- 
damien clochard
http://dalibo.org | http://dalibo.com