New RFR -- Zanata instance

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:11:19AM -0400, Jared Smith wrote:
> 2) Some people have expressed concerns to me personally that they're
> uncomfortable having a core piece of Fedora infrastructure hosted by a
> third-party, even if we have a great relationship with that third
> party.
>
The thing about this is that I don't think anyone on the present
infrastructure team sees this as a problem; unless I've forgotten someone
I think that we're unanimous in thinking of this as an opportunity.  So the
foundation of this argument carries less than zero weight with us (less as
this argument just gets people to feeling that the people proposing the
change are doing so because of fundamental disagreements that we'll never
agree with.)

Any change to production infrastructure will need to have reasons that
transifex.net is a less desirable solution than something else that we
manage.

> 3) At the same time, there's always been a lack of community
> involvement in the day-to-day maintenance (from a infrastructure
> standpoint) of Fedora's translation infrastructure.  If we go back to
> any soft of self-hosted translation system (Transifex, Zanata, or
> anything else), it's going to need a small team of folks from the
> Fedora community to step up and dedicate themselves to keeping it
> running, keeping it patched, and keeping it upgraded.  The ongoing
> maintenance burden is a something that keeps folks like me awake at
> night, and shouldn't be taken lightly.
>
Noting here that you earn a greater degree of trust and freedom to make
decisions when you join the Infrastructure team and happen to focus on
a project rather than working on a project within infrastructure.  The shift
in emphasis there is whether you are around on IRC, contribute to other
areas that aren't your primary focus, and generally, have a presence that
says, I'm not just going to disappear and leave my projects resting on your
shoulders in the future.

> 4) Another thing to consider is whether a self-hosted solution has
> been packaged for Fedora.  I know that Transifex is packaged for
> Fedora, but I don't see Zanata in the package list.
>
Zanata is built on the JBoss framework and JBoss hasn't even been packaged
in Fedora.

> 6) While this concept is currently being discussed here on the
> infrastructure list, I think it's really a subject that needs to be
> discussed with a wider audience.  It's a topic that affects
> infrastructure, translation, packagers, and documentation at a
> minimum.  My plan is to kick of some discussions in those groups, and
> then try to schedule a wider meeting in the next two weeks (similar to
> the meetings we held before the transition to tx.net).
>
So... having been a part of the multi-year insight development from the
infrastructure side, there's two aspects:

Consuming groups:
1) What features do we need?
2) What features do we desire?
3) What manpower can we pony up to deploy this?
4) What manpower can we pony up to maintain this?
5) What is out there that might satisfy our needs?

Providing groups (infra):
1) What computing resources are needed to support this?
2) What manpower resources are needed to support this?
   2.a) What security implications does running this entail?
   2.b) Do we have inhouse knowledge that will support running this?
   2.c) Do we have in-Fedora knowledge to fall back on?
   2.e) Is this something we need to run?
3) What is the effect on Fedora if we find that we cannot continue to
   support this in the future?
4) What is out there that's going to be easiest to support?

In the early stages, the consuming groups are really doing the most
evaluation since they have to determine what features they must have and
what features they desire to have.  However, they either need to understand
the support burden so they have something decent to present to
infrastructure or (probably preferably) they need to stop their evaluation
short of trying actual products and get someone in infrastructure interested
in their list of features at that point so that they can evaluate the
choices together.

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20110616/62a7a2a2/attachment.bin