Fedora Infrastructure announces status.fedoraproject.org

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:21:26 -0500
Jon Ciesla <limburgher at gmail.com> wrote:

> >> I might have missed something, but are there plans to add bugzilla
> >> to this?
> >
> > It was suggested, but we don't actually run bugzilla.redhat.com or
> > have anything to do with it. So it would be a bit difficult to try
> > and report status on it when all we could see is 'it's down' or 'it
> > seems to be up now'
> 
> That by itself would be enough for me.  And for anyone who sees some
> failure and has no idea what's going on.  Even with a not saying
> "maintained by RH, not Fedora Inf", or somesuch.

I'd really like to avoid that, because it would lead to: 

"when is it going to be up?" -> no idea. 
"It works for me, but not for otheruser, is there a network problem?"
-> no idea. 
"You are saying it's down, but it's up for me" (mark it up, site goes
down again because of some ongoing problem) "Now it's down, please mark
it down again" -> If we managed it, we would know the ongoing issue and
could update when it was approprate/fully back up. 

And cases where we mark it down, when it's not, or only for some users,
etc. 

It also opens the door for "Oh, can you monitor my fedora related site
and report on it there?" which I REALLY don't want to do. The updates
are a manual process, so it's already another step someone in
Infrastructure has to do when there is an outage. 

Lets keep it to sites that Fedora Infrastructure directly manages. 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120831/8c9d1aaa/attachment.sig>