Hosted plans

[Mike McGrath]

On Mon, 8 Aug 2011, Stephen Gallagher wrote:

> On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 10:54 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Hosted01 has the following items on it:
> >
> > * apache/httpd
> > 	gitweb
> > 	other scm web
> > 	trac
> > 	mailman archive http access
> > 	source downloads (tar.gz, etc)
> > 	loggerhead
> > 	reviewboard
>
> I've been talking with Mike McGrath about ReviewBoard. I really want to
> get ReviewBoard off of Hosted, as the performance is incredibly poor and
> the FAS integration causes problems that I have not had a chance to
> identify.
>
> Furthermore, starting with ReviewBoard 1.5.6 (being released upstream
> soon), I've submitted patches to make it possible to use ReviewBoard
> against any FedoraHosted git repository remotely. The main reason that
> ReviewBoard was located on FedoraHosted to begin with is because it
> needed direct access to the git repositories. So I'd like to move
> ReviewBoard to one of the app servers or into an OpenShift instance.
>
> Of course, we still have issues regarding the FAS integration. For
> reasons I've still not been able to nail down, it causes us to lose
> access to the server. I was hoping to switch over to using OpenID with
> the release of ReviewBoard 1.6, but unfortunately they've deferred that
> feature until 1.7.
>
> So I'm proposing the following options:
>
> 1) Move our existing ReviewBoard instance to one of the app servers.
> This will significantly improve the performance and responsiveness, but
> we'll still have no email notification support (due to as-yet-unknown
> negative interaction with FAS integration)
> 2) Move ReviewBoard to an app server and drop integration with FAS and
> allow standard enrollment for users, be they Fedora users or not. This
> will solve the performance and email issues, but results in a server
> running on Fedora systems that is not using Fedora accounts. Also I'm
> not sure we can maintain the existing review histories for the few
> projects currently using the system.
> 3) Turn ReviewBoard into a turnkey OpenShift virtual instance and allow
> any Fedora Hosted project to spin one up. This instance would use
> standard enrollment (rather than FAS integration, which is impossible
> outside the Infra firewall). Each project could have its own complete
> instance to maintain on its own. Upsides: less work for Fedora Admins,
> support for email and better performance. Downsides: no
> centrally-managed user accounts and projects need to do more of the
> maintaining of the system themselves.
>

FYI, just in the last hour or so we've got full support for this in
OpenShift.  Here's a howto on running reviewboard:

https://github.com/openshift/reviewboard-example

	-Mike