Обсуждение: postgresql.org mail infrastructure
The postgresql.org mail infrastructure is currently deeply intertwined with the hub.org system. This makes it difficult for the 2 non-hub.org people who have access to manage the systems, and means that any problems with hub.org affect us, and any problems caused by us will affect hub.org customers. I propose that we build a replacement mail system, tailored to our needs. This would be built on our existing FreeBSD infrastructure and would be managed by members of the existing sysadmin team including myself, Magnus, Stefan and Marc. Further, it has been suggested that OmniTI may be able to offer assistance. Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such a project? -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK Ltd: http://www.enterprisedb.com PostgreSQL UK 2008 Conference: http://www.postgresql.org.uk
On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 16:07:13 +0000 "Dave Page" <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such > a project? > +1. I will donate any time required (and hardware if needed). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit
Dave Page wrote: > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such > a project? +1 //Magnus
On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 16:07:13 +0000 Dave Page wrote: > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such > a project? +1 for an own PostgreSQL mail infrastructure. If you need a helping hand, please let me know. Kind regards -- Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum German PostgreSQL User Group European PostgreSQL User Group - Board of Directors
Dave Page a écrit : > [...] > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such > a project? > +1 for our own mail infrastructure. -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
Dave Page wrote: > I propose that we build a replacement mail system, tailored to our > needs. This would be built on our existing FreeBSD infrastructure and > would be managed by members of the existing sysadmin team including > myself, Magnus, Stefan and Marc. Further, it has been suggested that > OmniTI may be able to offer assistance. > > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such > a project? +1 to the project -- assuming that it means a change of infrastructure and not necessarily of tools. I, for one, would oppose changing Mj2 for Mailman, for instance. (However, whether we use Sendmail or Postfix or something else entirely I don't care ...) -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:39:34 -0300 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > +1 to the project -- assuming that it means a change of infrastructure > and not necessarily of tools. I, for one, would oppose changing Mj2 > for Mailman, for instance. (However, whether we use Sendmail or > Postfix or something else entirely I don't care ...) Actually this is a good point. We really should define requirements as part of this, let's not just do it wholesale. Here are a couple: * Software must be open source?* Environment must be managed by the community* Attempt to have admins in each of the followingtimezones EST PST CET * I believe with those three we have 24x7 coverage* FreeBSD is OS? Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH5UZrATb/zqfZUUQRAj3+AKCTzb0DFBOyxP5RpYCYAB3/HtmhwwCgqa5y PcKNhU5HErqP+qmVjLh8cQc= =fpE7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:39:34 -0300 > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > > +1 to the project -- assuming that it means a change of infrastructure > > and not necessarily of tools. I, for one, would oppose changing Mj2 > > for Mailman, for instance. (However, whether we use Sendmail or > > Postfix or something else entirely I don't care ...) > > Actually this is a good point. We really should define requirements as > part of this, let's not just do it wholesale. Here are a couple: > > * Software must be open source? > * Environment must be managed by the community > * Attempt to have admins in each of the following timezones > EST > PST > CET > * I believe with those three we have 24x7 coverage > * FreeBSD is OS? Please stick to the point of this thread. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK Ltd: http://www.enterprisedb.com PostgreSQL UK 2008 Conference: http://www.postgresql.org.uk
On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 10:48:27 -0700 Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:39:34 -0300 > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > > +1 to the project -- assuming that it means a change of infrastructure > > and not necessarily of tools. I, for one, would oppose changing Mj2 > > for Mailman, for instance. (However, whether we use Sendmail or > > Postfix or something else entirely I don't care ...) > > Actually this is a good point. We really should define requirements as > part of this, let's not just do it wholesale. I'm first for checking, if we find an agreement about either creating a new mail infrastructure, stabilizing the current situation or (which i would find pity) doing nothing at all. The next step, if any, would be to find out, if we need a new domain. Because in case of a new domain we have a lot more problems to solve than just the question which software to use. > * Environment must be managed by the community I would say, this question is implicated. If we vote for a new mail infrastructure, this surely not means to give away this infrastructure into the hands of another company, or? Or? > * Attempt to have admins in each of the following timezones > EST > PST > CET That's a job for the sysadmin team, not to discuss here. If we need more helping hands in this team, this can be discussed and solved in another thread. > * FreeBSD is OS? Same thing -> sysadmin team. So let's stay on topic. If we have a decision we can create other mail threads and discuss the details. Thank you & kind regards -- Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum German PostgreSQL User Group European PostgreSQL User Group - Board of Directors
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Dave Page wrote: > > > I propose that we build a replacement mail system, tailored to our > > needs. This would be built on our existing FreeBSD infrastructure and > > would be managed by members of the existing sysadmin team including > > myself, Magnus, Stefan and Marc. Further, it has been suggested that > > OmniTI may be able to offer assistance. > > > > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such > > a project? > > +1 to the project -- assuming that it means a change of infrastructure > and not necessarily of tools. I, for one, would oppose changing Mj2 for > Mailman, for instance. (However, whether we use Sendmail or Postfix or > something else entirely I don't care ...) Agreed. I think the proposal is to move the FreeBSD jails in their entirety to servers that a community team can manage. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Dave Page wrote: > The postgresql.org mail infrastructure is currently deeply intertwined > with the hub.org system. This makes it difficult for the 2 non-hub.org > people who have access to manage the systems, and means that any > problems with hub.org affect us, and any problems caused by us will > affect hub.org customers. yeah - I think this fact adds quite some complexity to the whole system - and keeping things simple is quite often a really good concept. > > I propose that we build a replacement mail system, tailored to our > needs. This would be built on our existing FreeBSD infrastructure and > would be managed by members of the existing sysadmin team including > myself, Magnus, Stefan and Marc. Further, it has been suggested that > OmniTI may be able to offer assistance. > > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such > a project? well such a project would be a fairly large undertaking and needs to be planned properly - but +1 on the idea of decoupling the hub.org infrastructure from the postgresql.org on at least a logical (ie seperate jails) level. Stefan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:53:31 +0000 "Dave Page" <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 5:48 PM, Joshua D. Drake > <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:39:34 -0300 > > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > > > > +1 to the project -- assuming that it means a change of > > > infrastructure and not necessarily of tools. I, for one, would > > > oppose changing Mj2 for Mailman, for instance. (However, > > > whether we use Sendmail or Postfix or something else entirely I > > > don't care ...) > > > > Actually this is a good point. We really should define > > requirements as part of this, let's not just do it wholesale. Here > > are a couple: > > > > * Software must be open source? > > * Environment must be managed by the community > > * Attempt to have admins in each of the following timezones > > EST > > PST > > CET > > * I believe with those three we have 24x7 coverage > > * FreeBSD is OS? > > Please stick to the point of this thread. Sorry I wasn't trying to diverge. Joshua D. Drake - -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ United States PostgreSQL Association: http://www.postgresql.us/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH5WKmATb/zqfZUUQRAv8SAJ9iGBCI/WNUU4gNJByoj/EY9MZK2ACghPD7 3dbFnnM7AuBpSTB3dcGEgK4= =Ektg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi, On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 16:07 +0000, Dave Page wrote: > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such > a project? +1. -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Please note that as much as Bruce seems to be misguided into thinking this has something to do with the WWW setup, it isn't ... changes in this infrastructure will be (and is being) discussed on -core, specifically between Tom, Dave and myself ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Devrim G�ND�Z wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 16:07 +0000, Dave Page wrote: >> Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such >> a project? > > +1. > -- > Devrim GÜNDÜZ , RHCE > PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support > Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting > Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.commandprompt.com/ >
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > Please note that as much as Bruce seems to be misguided into thinking this > has something to do with the WWW setup, it isn't ... changes in this > infrastructure will be (and is being) discussed on -core, specifically > between Tom, Dave and myself ... People ask about all infrastructure issues on this list. If there is an email problem, historically we have talked about it here. Do you want to set this list to moderated like Josh Berkus did with advocacy? (That didn't work out to well, as I remember). You want to set up a move-the-infrastructure email list? (That didn't work out well either.) "Don't like the message, stop them from communicating." I thought we learned from the advocacy debacle. It is true we are discussing this on core too but shouldn't stop discussion here. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote: > > Please note that as much as Bruce seems to be misguided into thinking this > has something to do with the WWW setup, it isn't ... changes in this > infrastructure will be (and is being) discussed on -core, specifically > between Tom, Dave and myself ... I would argue that it's a sysadmin team issue to resolve (the lead people in that group being you, me, Stefan and Magnus), however, Bruce is correct in that the public side of the sysadmin/infrastructure work does generally end up being discussed on this list. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK Ltd: http://www.enterprisedb.com PostgreSQL UK 2008 Conference: http://www.postgresql.org.uk
On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Dave Page wrote: > On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote: >> >> Please note that as much as Bruce seems to be misguided into thinking this >> has something to do with the WWW setup, it isn't ... changes in this >> infrastructure will be (and is being) discussed on -core, specifically >> between Tom, Dave and myself ... > > I would argue that it's a sysadmin team issue to resolve (the lead > people in that group being you, me, Stefan and Magnus) it would be an easy argument to make too ...
Just a short top-post here ... as I mentioned before, Dave/Tom/I have been discussing this issue on -core, with it degenerating to 'Dave/I' ... we have a plan to move forward on this based on discussions that actually happened a couple of weeks ago as a percursor to this ... Dave/I will be posting a summary of our scheduale/plan to sysadmins later this evening, as this is an infrastructure, not WWW, issue ... Thank you ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email . scrappy@hub.org MSN . scrappy@hub.org Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664 On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Dave Page wrote: > >> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote: >>> >>> Please note that as much as Bruce seems to be misguided into thinking >>> this >>> has something to do with the WWW setup, it isn't ... changes in this >>> infrastructure will be (and is being) discussed on -core, specifically >>> between Tom, Dave and myself ... >> >> I would argue that it's a sysadmin team issue to resolve (the lead >> people in that group being you, me, Stefan and Magnus) > > it would be an easy argument to make too ... > > -- > Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www >
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > Just a short top-post here ... as I mentioned before, Dave/Tom/I have > been discussing this issue on -core, with it degenerating to 'Dave/I' > ... we have a plan to move forward on this based on discussions that > actually happened a couple of weeks ago as a percursor to this ... > > Dave/I will be posting a summary of our scheduale/plan to sysadmins > later this evening, as this is an infrastructure, not WWW, issue ... > > Thank you ... Thanks Marc! I appreciate seeing this move forward! //Magnus
On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> >> Just a short top-post here ... as I mentioned before, Dave/Tom/I have been >> discussing this issue on -core, with it degenerating to 'Dave/I' ... we >> have a plan to move forward on this based on discussions that actually >> happened a couple of weeks ago as a percursor to this ... >> >> Dave/I will be posting a summary of our scheduale/plan to sysadmins later >> this evening, as this is an infrastructure, not WWW, issue ... >> >> Thank you ... > > Thanks Marc! I appreciate seeing this move forward! NP ... I hadn't even realized that our previous talks on this *had* stalled, but I suspect Bruce missed that thread and jump'd in between us having an agreed on target, and actually implementing it ... It happens.
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > On Sat, 22 Mar 2008, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >> > >> Just a short top-post here ... as I mentioned before, Dave/Tom/I have been > >> discussing this issue on -core, with it degenerating to 'Dave/I' ... we > >> have a plan to move forward on this based on discussions that actually > >> happened a couple of weeks ago as a percursor to this ... > >> > >> Dave/I will be posting a summary of our scheduale/plan to sysadmins later > >> this evening, as this is an infrastructure, not WWW, issue ... > >> > >> Thank you ... > > > > Thanks Marc! I appreciate seeing this move forward! > > NP ... I hadn't even realized that our previous talks on this *had* > stalled, but I suspect Bruce missed that thread and jump'd in between us > having an agreed on target, and actually implementing it ... > > It happens. Frankly, I don't care what the outcome of this is as long as other people feel we are moving forward. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
> Frankly, I don't care what the outcome of this is as long as other > people feel we are moving forward. Well, considering that Magnus was the one (if I recall correctly) was the one that was advocating the direction that we had decided to take, and he wasn't doing much pushing (which I know he will do if it is taking too long), I suspect that you are about the only one feeling impatient with how fast this was going ...
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > > Frankly, I don't care what the outcome of this is as long as other > > people feel we are moving forward. > > Well, considering that Magnus was the one (if I recall correctly) was the > one that was advocating the direction that we had decided to take, and he > wasn't doing much pushing (which I know he will do if it is taking too > long), I suspect that you are about the only one feeling impatient with > how fast this was going ... After out outage this week, with few people able to help, many of us were frustrated. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 04:07:13PM +0000, Dave Page wrote: > The postgresql.org mail infrastructure is currently deeply > intertwined with the hub.org system. This makes it difficult for the > 2 non-hub.org people who have access to manage the systems, and > means that any problems with hub.org affect us, and any problems > caused by us will affect hub.org customers. > > I propose that we build a replacement mail system, tailored to our > needs. This would be built on our existing FreeBSD infrastructure > and would be managed by members of the existing sysadmin team > including myself, Magnus, Stefan and Marc. Further, it has been > suggested that OmniTI may be able to offer assistance. > > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with > such a project? +1 for progressing. Cheers, David -- David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > >> Frankly, I don't care what the outcome of this is as long as other >> people feel we are moving forward. > > Well, considering that Magnus was the one (if I recall correctly) was > the one that was advocating the direction that we had decided to take, > and he wasn't doing much pushing (which I know he will do if it is > taking too long), I suspect that you are about the only one feeling > impatient with how fast this was going ... To be fair, the reason I stopped pushing was that I didn't expect it to have any effect. It's not like it's had it before. But that was for getting it started. once it's started and we're in agreement that things should be done, we should be sure to plan it out properly before we actually start pulling things apart, of course! Just so things don't stall... //Magnus
> > Can I please get a show of hands for and against progressing with such > a project? > +1 -- damien clochard http://dalibo.org | http://dalibo.com