Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Gforge-admins] PgFoundry Move
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:39:34 +0100
Message-ID: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE92E9D6@algol.sollentuna.se>
Thread-Topic: [pgsql-www] [Gforge-admins] PgFoundry Move
Thread-Index: AcYa7SHj/NwZZCqfTtyOS5jbgLZgggAADrAw
From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net>
To: "Darcy Buskermolen" <darcy@wavefire.com>,
	<gforge-admins@pgfoundry.org>
Cc: "Gavin M. Roy" <gmr@ehpg.net>, <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>

> > > My concerns with a plan like this are:
> > > A) I do not know linux as well as FreeBSD.
> >
> > 80% of the Gforge admins are Linux guys afaik, which is why we need=20
> > more FreeBSD help.
>=20
> Which is why at least 2 more FreeBSD guys (Stefan and myself)=20
> were brought into the fold a while back.  I can't speek for=20
> Stefan, but I have remained quite on this while I absorb the=20
> implementation specifics of the current setup.

Ok. That's good :-)


> > > B) Can infrastructure be provided to allow for timely disaster=20
> > > recovery in the event of JD's hosting falling off the face of the=20
> > > earth, (much the same way the pg servers in panama fell=20
> off a while=20
> > > ago).
> >
> > We don't have this *really* in the case of most of the=20
> infrastructure,=20
> > and this isn't in place for pgFoundry right now with Marc hosting,=20
> > afaik.  It is an issue we should be concerned with=20
> regardless of who's=20
> > hosting.  That and backup.  I've tried to address what's=20
> happening (or=20
> > not happening as I'm afraid) with backup before.
>=20
> Wether we have it today or not is one thing, but making it=20
> even harder to do in the future without having a solid plan=20
> is even more troublesome in my opinion.

Yeah. The question is more wether it's the right path to move down, if
it's been so hard to get there.


> > Unlike *BSD?  Generally there have been distros like Debian and=20
> > Slackware that have been server grade for over 10 years and=20
> are solid. =20
> > I think the distro of the month is a unwarranted slam from FreeBSD=20
> > people who don't see that others see BSD the same way (Free, Net,=20
> > Open, etc) just with less choice for their respective communities. =20
> > There are lots of Linux distros.  Some are better at the=20
> desktop, some=20
> > are better at the server.  Coming up with a consensus of=20
> what to use=20
> > would be pretty easy to do.  That being said, I don't foresee a day=20
> > that we'd use Linux just because everything else is running on=20
> > FreeBSD.  Being consistent is a good thing.
>=20
> For example we raninto an issue here were  we ended up with=20
> 100% distro lock-in because of a hardware vendor only=20
> providing binary kernel modules for one specific distro and=20
> kernel version.  Granted that is not a fault with "linux"  in=20
> general, but it did mean I had to support some one ofs where=20
> consistency would have been the preferred norm.

Yes, that's generally a big problem - only the commercial distros are
supported by the hw vendors. But AFAIK, few if any of these vendors put
out *ANY* drivers for FreeBSD at all.

But that's turning into a discussion Linux vs FreeBSD on technical
merits. Which is not the point I was making, and I doubt the one others
was. Technically, they're both good. They both have their good and their
bad sides, of course.
The point was one  of resources.

//Magnus