opengroupware evaluation

[Mike McGrath]

I'd like one of our volunteers to install opengroupware on a publictest
server for our evaluation.

https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1197

This is going to take between 5 and 15 hours a week.  Don't volunteer
unless you can commit that much time to it.

-Mike

[susmit shannigrahi]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Mike McGrath  wrote:
> I'd like one of our volunteers to install opengroupware on a publictest
> server for our evaluation.
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1197
>
> This is going to take between 5 and 15 hours a week.  Don't volunteer
> unless you can commit that much time to it.

I can commit some time from the coming week. (23rd.)
If that is ok, I can do it.
It has been long since I have something for Infra. :)
Thanks.

[susmit shannigrahi]

done
> It has been long since I have ^ something for Infra. :)

[Mike McGrath]

On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, susmit shannigrahi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Mike McGrath  wrote:
> > I'd like one of our volunteers to install opengroupware on a publictest
> > server for our evaluation.
> >
> > https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1197
> >
> > This is going to take between 5 and 15 hours a week.  Don't volunteer
> > unless you can commit that much time to it.
>
> I can commit some time from the coming week. (23rd.)
> If that is ok, I can do it.
> It has been long since I have something for Infra. :)
> Thanks.

Works for me, I may partner a couple of people on this but ping me next
week and we'll figure out what to do next.

-Mike

[susmit shannigrahi]

> Works for me, I may partner a couple of people on this but ping me next
> week and we'll figure out what to do next.

ping.
I am back.

[Clint Savage]

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, susmit shannigrahi
 wrote:
> > Works for me, I may partner a couple of people on this but ping me next
> > week and we'll figure out what to do next.
>
> ping.
> I am back.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Susmit.

Whoa!  How did I miss this?  I can help with this if that's to be one
of the tools we use to evaluate for calendaring.  I'm also interested
in installing some of the other servers if that's a viable option as I
think some of the other tools might be as useful, if not more.

I'm seriously interested in helping to install and maintain the
calendar server we choose, so I hope I'm not out of line here.

Cheers,

Clint

[Mike McGrath]

On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, susmit shannigrahi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Mike McGrath  wrote:
> > I'd like one of our volunteers to install opengroupware on a publictest
> > server for our evaluation.
> >
> > https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1197
> >
> > This is going to take between 5 and 15 hours a week.  Don't volunteer
> > unless you can commit that much time to it.
>
> I can commit some time from the coming week. (23rd.)
> If that is ok, I can do it.
> It has been long since I have something for Infra. :)
> Thanks.

Just checking in, how did things go?  Any updates?

Any one else interested in joining susmit to get this up and running?

-Mike

[TJ Davis]

I can spare a few hours a week to work on it.  I might need someone to
mentor me on it if that is an option because I am new other than the time
that I was looking at the redundant OpenVPN scenarios with you.  What groups
would I need to apply for?  Username is tjdavisbz.

TJ Davis

On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Mike McGrath  wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, susmit shannigrahi wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:33 PM, Mike McGrath
>
> wrote:
> > > I'd like one of our volunteers to install opengroupware on a publictest
> > > server for our evaluation.
> > >
> > > https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1197
> > >
> > > This is going to take between 5 and 15 hours a week.  Don't volunteer
> > > unless you can commit that much time to it.
> >
> > I can commit some time from the coming week. (23rd.)
> > If that is ok, I can do it.
> > It has been long since I have something for Infra. :)
> > Thanks.
>
> Just checking in, how did things go?  Any updates?
>
> Any one else interested in joining susmit to get this up and running?
>    -Mike
>
> Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

[Clint Savage]

2009/2/27 TJ Davis :
> I can spare a few hours a week to work on it.  I might need someone to
> mentor me on it if that is an option because I am new other than the time
> that I was looking at the redundant OpenVPN scenarios with you.  What groups
> would I need to apply for?  Username is tjdavisbz.
>
> TJ Davis

TJ,

Welcome.  Join the sysadmin-test group in FAS.  I'm in the same boat
as you, a few hours to spare every week.

Cheers,

Clint

[TJ Davis]

Thanks, I have applied for sysadmin-test.

TJ Davis

On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Clint Savage  wrote:
> 2009/2/27 TJ Davis :
> > I can spare a few hours a week to work on it.  I might need someone to
> > mentor me on it if that is an option because I am new other than the time
> > that I was looking at the redundant OpenVPN scenarios with you.  What
>
> groups
> > would I need to apply for?  Username is tjdavisbz.
> >
> > TJ Davis
>
> TJ,
>
> Welcome.  Join the sysadmin-test group in FAS.  I'm in the same boat
> as you, a few hours to spare every week.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Clint
>
> Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

[Mike McGrath]

On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, TJ Davis wrote:
> Thanks, I have applied for sysadmin-test.

Right now susmit has lead on this but I'm not sure what his time
constraints are over the next couple of weeks.  If he's busy I'll just
make sure you guys all have access and can hammer away at it a couple of
hours at a time.

-Mike
> TJ Davis
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Clint Savage  wrote:
>       2009/2/27 TJ Davis :
>       > I can spare a few hours a week to work on it.  I might need someone to
>       > mentor me on it if that is an option because I am new other than the time
>       > that I was looking at the redundant OpenVPN scenarios with you.  What groups
>       > would I need to apply for?  Username is tjdavisbz.
>       >
>       >
>       > TJ Davis
>       >
>       >
> TJ,
>
> Welcome.  Join the sysadmin-test group in FAS.  I'm in the same boat
> as you, a few hours to spare every week.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Clint
>
> Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list

[susmit shannigrahi]

2009/2/28 Mike McGrath :
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, TJ Davis wrote:
> > Thanks, I have applied for sysadmin-test.
>
> Right now susmit has lead on this but I'm not sure what his time
> constraints are over the next couple of weeks.  If he's busy I'll just
> make sure you guys all have access and can hammer away at it a couple of
> hours at a time.

No, I can commit time right now.
I was away a couple of days, I read up the documentations.
If I get a couple of more people, it will be nice. :)

[David Nalley]

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 1:50 PM, susmit shannigrahi
 wrote:
> 2009/2/28 Mike McGrath :
> > On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, TJ Davis wrote:
> > > Thanks, I have applied for sysadmin-test.
> >
> > Right now susmit has lead on this but I'm not sure what his time
> > constraints are over the next couple of weeks.  If he's busy I'll just
> > make sure you guys all have access and can hammer away at it a couple of
> > hours at a time.
>
> No, I can commit time right now.
> I was away a couple of days, I read up the documentations.
> If I get a couple of more people, it will be nice. :)

So I'll note that when looking at this recently I see that
Skyrix/Inverse released Scalable OGo (It was a custom solution at one
point which was OGo without the document management system/crm-like
components.) I've managed a few hundred user instance of OGo, but SOGo
was made to handle tens of thousands of users, and it looks a bit
simpler. I also fear that OGo is approaching stagnation, it could just
be that it has reached maturity and changes aren't that big of a
deal.. While the changelog rss feed showed 5 or so commits, it looks
like a lot of the other things are slow - nothing more recent than FC3
instructions or packages. Apparently back in the RHEL3 time frame
Harald Hoyer was maintaining some RPM packages, but the spec
files/srpms seem to have disappeared.

Take a look at scalable ogo:
http://scalableogo.org

[Mike McGrath]

On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, David Nalley wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 1:50 PM, susmit shannigrahi
>  wrote:
> > 2009/2/28 Mike McGrath :
> > > On Fri, 27 Feb 2009, TJ Davis wrote:
> > > > Thanks, I have applied for sysadmin-test.
> > >
> > > Right now susmit has lead on this but I'm not sure what his time
> > > constraints are over the next couple of weeks.  If he's busy I'll just
> > > make sure you guys all have access and can hammer away at it a couple of
> > > hours at a time.
> >
> > No, I can commit time right now.
> > I was away a couple of days, I read up the documentations.
> > If I get a couple of more people, it will be nice. :)
>
> So I'll note that when looking at this recently I see that
> Skyrix/Inverse released Scalable OGo (It was a custom solution at one
> point which was OGo without the document management system/crm-like
> components.) I've managed a few hundred user instance of OGo, but SOGo
> was made to handle tens of thousands of users, and it looks a bit
> simpler. I also fear that OGo is approaching stagnation, it could just
> be that it has reached maturity and changes aren't that big of a
> deal.. While the changelog rss feed showed 5 or so commits, it looks
> like a lot of the other things are slow - nothing more recent than FC3
> instructions or packages. Apparently back in the RHEL3 time frame
> Harald Hoyer was maintaining some RPM packages, but the spec
> files/srpms seem to have disappeared.
>
> Take a look at scalable ogo:
> http://scalableogo.org

What are your concerns about ogo stagnation?  Does sogo have more
momentum or is it just a new fork?

-Mike

[David Nalley]

2009/3/1 Mike McGrath :
> What are your concerns about ogo stagnation?  Does sogo have more
> momentum or is it just a new fork?

I see the following potential things which lead me to believe that OGo
is stagnated or close to it:
September of 2007 appears to be the last time the website was updated for OGo.
The -users list had 36 messages in February, 16 in January, none in
December and 8 in November.
Moreover of the two projects OGo is far more complex. Latest packages
for the Fedora/RHEL world include FC[1-3], RH9 and RHEL3.

Contrast that with Scalable OGo
The users mailing list had 123 messages in February and 85 in January.
(and I didn't look further)
Website last updated 2009-01-30
Packages exist for RHEL5

Scalable OGo was really a project that Skyrix (the company behind OGo)
took on as project work for a customer and eventually released as open
source. So yes it's technically a fork, but not in the bad sense of
the word. Moreover the fact that SOGo doesn't have the public file
storage and document management system aspect which means it's less
complex for us. Regardless it does seem to have more momentum. That
said I merely toss that out there for consideration. Others are doing
the work, and I don't want to bikeshed this, so feel free to ignore
me.

[Mike McGrath]

On Sun, 1 Mar 2009, David Nalley wrote:
> 2009/3/1 Mike McGrath :
> > What are your concerns about ogo stagnation?  Does sogo have more
> > momentum or is it just a new fork?
>
> I see the following potential things which lead me to believe that OGo
> is stagnated or close to it:
> September of 2007 appears to be the last time the website was updated for OGo.
> The -users list had 36 messages in February, 16 in January, none in
> December and 8 in November.
> Moreover of the two projects OGo is far more complex. Latest packages
> for the Fedora/RHEL world include FC[1-3], RH9 and RHEL3.
>
> Contrast that with Scalable OGo
> The users mailing list had 123 messages in February and 85 in January.
> (and I didn't look further)
> Website last updated 2009-01-30
> Packages exist for RHEL5
>
> Scalable OGo was really a project that Skyrix (the company behind OGo)
> took on as project work for a customer and eventually released as open
> source. So yes it's technically a fork, but not in the bad sense of
> the word. Moreover the fact that SOGo doesn't have the public file
> storage and document management system aspect which means it's less
> complex for us. Regardless it does seem to have more momentum. That
> said I merely toss that out there for consideration. Others are doing
> the work, and I don't want to bikeshed this, so feel free to ignore
> me.

WORKSFORME, lets set it up.  No harm in taking a look at it.

-Mike

[susmit shannigrahi]

> WORKSFORME, lets set it up.  No harm in taking a look at it.

I had a question, should I do it the puppet way or locally on publictest15 ?

[Mike McGrath]

On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, susmit shannigrahi wrote:
> > WORKSFORME, lets set it up.  No harm in taking a look at it.
>
> I had a question, should I do it the puppet way or locally on publictest15 ?

For now all local on pt15.  First we just want to see if these apps will
do what we want to.  If they will then we'll look closer at getting them
into puppet and ultimately into production.

-Mike

[Axel Thimm]

Hi,

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:03:22AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> I'd like one of our volunteers to install opengroupware on a publictest
> server for our evaluation.
>
> https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1197
>
> This is going to take between 5 and 15 hours a week.  Don't volunteer
> unless you can commit that much time to it.

I've tried to setup ogo a couple of times, and it is cumbersome
work. I also tried to package it and push it into Fedora, but that's
non-trivial, from the use of non-FHSable gnustep-make to an own
foundation library to non-compliant init scripts in sope etc. The
gnustep-make package for example needs to currently "decide" at build
time whether to support ogo or the rest of gnustep-* packages in the
review queue. :(

I dont know about sogo, I hope things have improved (at least the
binary packages' versions show updates needed for bridging the gap
between gnustep-* and ogo), and the evaluation will show the status,
but from what I've looked up recently it looks like bedework is also a
good candidate for a Fedora calendaring system.

http://www.bedework.org/bedework/

Please consider giving bedework a try as well.

[Mike McGrath]

On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Axel Thimm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:03:22AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > I'd like one of our volunteers to install opengroupware on a publictest
> > server for our evaluation.
> >
> > https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1197
> >
> > This is going to take between 5 and 15 hours a week.  Don't volunteer
> > unless you can commit that much time to it.
>
> I've tried to setup ogo a couple of times, and it is cumbersome
> work. I also tried to package it and push it into Fedora, but that's
> non-trivial, from the use of non-FHSable gnustep-make to an own
> foundation library to non-compliant init scripts in sope etc. The
> gnustep-make package for example needs to currently "decide" at build
> time whether to support ogo or the rest of gnustep-* packages in the
> review queue. :(
>
> I dont know about sogo, I hope things have improved (at least the
> binary packages' versions show updates needed for bridging the gap
> between gnustep-* and ogo), and the evaluation will show the status,
> but from what I've looked up recently it looks like bedework is also a
> good candidate for a Fedora calendaring system.
>
> http://www.bedework.org/bedework/
>
> Please consider giving bedework a try as well.

Thanks, that looks pretty slick too.  I'll add it to our list to look at.

-Mike

bedeford (was: opengroupware evaluation)

[Axel Thimm]

On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 08:52:12AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > Please consider giving bedework a try as well.
>
> Thanks, that looks pretty slick too.  I'll add it to our list to look at.

BTW according to our fedora-devel archives there was a guy on
fedora-devel, Trever L. Adams, whom I Cc'd, who mentioned wanting
to package up bedework. He periodically mentioned this in the last 12
months and maybe all he needs is a little help with java packaging.

Trever, are you still interested in packaging bedeford for Fedora? The
current needs in infrastructure will certainly make many more people
help and assist in any such efforts.

[susmit shannigrahi]

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 8:22 PM, Mike McGrath  wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:03:22AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > > I'd like one of our volunteers to install opengroupware on a publictest
> > > server for our evaluation.

Update:
1. OGO seems to be so very messy.
2. I am halfway configuring SOGo.
3. It is easy, but a few issues with configuration including apache
conf and mod_proxy. But no big issue.
4. Downloaded bedework, will give it a go when SOGo is done.

Will update again soon.
Thanks.