On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 15:29:05 +0100
Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I personally do not like fedorainfracloud.org
. It is fine for
hostnames of machines in cloud. I would rather see some subdomain
- e.g. .devel.fedoraproject.org
or .playground.fedoraproject.org or something similar.
Well, it's in the cloud, so it's more descriptive, IMHO.
And sorry for the quick change, we needed new ssl certs very soon, so
thought it would make sense to get them with these names.
I personally dislike the change of copr.fedoraproject.org
. We have been usin this name for past two
years and it is referenced a lot (35k by Google):
This is not pure technical decision but marketing decision as well. A
lot of people are treating it as integral part of Fedora. So instead
of changing hostname I would rather start RFR process.
Well, for what? We have talked about moving the non builder parts of
copr into regular infrastructure in the past, but we didn't do it for
whatever reasons. Doing so would get us some advantages and some
Advantages: could use the proxy system to cache things and also do HA
with multiple frontends or possibly even backends if we wanted. Could
mean frontend/backend/sign/git are more stable as they are not on the
Disadvantages: would need to figure out how to shuffle around storage,
as we have copr storage tied to the cloud right now. It would be some
work to move things around and get it all working right.
I think that some icon at the top or link at the bottom of page,
which will clearly state the level of support will do the same from
technical POV, but will be better solution from marketing POV.
The problem with that is when the thing is down, users have no way to
look at that. They just see it's down and have the expectation that
they already do in their minds.