[Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[François Revol]

Hi,

> I'd like to move IRC channels from FreeNode to OFTC, so please join #qemu on OFTC starting now.

- what's wrong with freenode ? everyone is there.
- #define OFTC ?

François.

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[Brian Jackson]

On Thursday, December 09, 2010 08:06:10 am François Revol wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > I'd like to move IRC channels from FreeNode to OFTC, so please join #qemu
> > on OFTC starting now.
> 
> - what's wrong with freenode ? everyone is there.


I can't speak for Anthony or the other devs, but freenode has some strange 
policies:
A. Must be registered to talk in a channel
B. They have weird rules wrt running bots (ask #kvm how nice it was to have an 
infobot in there before freenode banned it)
C. They have strange rules about groups and channel ownership
D. Their non-profit status in the US was terminated for failure to file 
paperwork properly


They're run without any oversight, and there's no clear election or staff 
structure that suggests continuity of service.


> - #define OFTC ?


www.oftc.net
irc.oftc.net


> 
> François.

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 17:44, Brian Jackson wrote:
> A. Must be registered to talk in a channel

i'm fairly certain that is a per-channel setting

> C. They have strange rules about groups and channel ownership

ive never had a problem

> D. Their non-profit status in the US was terminated for failure to file
> paperwork properly

not terribly relevant if the network continues to function ... just
dont give them money
-mike

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[François Revol]

Le 24 janv. 2011 à 20:13, Mike Frysinger a écrit :

> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 17:44, Brian Jackson wrote:
>> A. Must be registered to talk in a channel
> 
> i'm fairly certain that is a per-channel setting

Indeed, only on #qemu do I have to identify to talk, other channels don't require it.

>> D. Their non-profit status in the US was terminated for failure to file
>> paperwork properly
> 
> not terribly relevant if the network continues to function ... just
> dont give them money

+1

François.

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[Brian Jackson]

On 1/24/2011 1:13 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 17:44, Brian Jackson wrote:
>> A. Must be registered to talk in a channel
> i'm fairly certain that is a per-channel setting


But none of the current developers have access to the channel to change 
the setting and it's on by default...


>> C. They have strange rules about groups and channel ownership
> ive never had a problem


Yeah, this was a bit vague. I think the biggest issue is that nobody 
that's actually involved in qemu currently has any ability to do 
anything with the #qemu@freenode. So it's either make a 
#therealqemu@freenode, try to convince freenode that the current 
developers should have access, or move to a network that is friendlier 
to it's users. Guess which one is easiest?


>> D. Their non-profit status in the US was terminated for failure to file
>> paperwork properly
> not terribly relevant if the network continues to function ... just
> dont give them money
> -mike
>

If nobody gives them money how are they going to continue operating?

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 15:05, Brian Jackson wrote:
> On 1/24/2011 1:13 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 17:44, Brian Jackson wrote:
>>> C. They have strange rules about groups and channel ownership
>>
>> ive never had a problem
>
> Yeah, this was a bit vague. I think the biggest issue is that nobody that's
> actually involved in qemu currently has any ability to do anything with the
> #qemu@freenode. So it's either make a #therealqemu@freenode, try to convince
> freenode that the current developers should have access, or move to a
> network that is friendlier to it's users. Guess which one is easiest?

so from your point, it's more a matter of "freenode sucks because
we've lost control of the official qemu channel" and "OFTC works
because we currently have active developers who control the official
qemu channel".  so when control is lost on OFTC, where to next ?  i
vote for EFnet.

>>> D. Their non-profit status in the US was terminated for failure to file
>>> paperwork properly
>>
>> not terribly relevant if the network continues to function ... just
>> dont give them money
>
> If nobody gives them money how are they going to continue operating?

considering they have volunteer servers from organizations that get
money for other reasons already, i dont think they're going to
implode.  or if they do, you then have an argument that no one can
defend -- "let's move to OFTC because freenode no longer exists".
-mike

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[Brian Jackson]

On 1/25/2011 4:24 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 15:05, Brian Jackson wrote:
>> On 1/24/2011 1:13 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 17:44, Brian Jackson wrote:
>>>> C. They have strange rules about groups and channel ownership
>>> ive never had a problem
>> Yeah, this was a bit vague. I think the biggest issue is that nobody that's
>> actually involved in qemu currently has any ability to do anything with the
>> #qemu@freenode. So it's either make a #therealqemu@freenode, try to convince
>> freenode that the current developers should have access, or move to a
>> network that is friendlier to it's users. Guess which one is easiest?
> so from your point, it's more a matter of "freenode sucks because
> we've lost control of the official qemu channel" and "OFTC works
> because we currently have active developers who control the official
> qemu channel".  so when control is lost on OFTC, where to next ?  i
> vote for EFnet.
>
>>>> D. Their non-profit status in the US was terminated for failure to file
>>>> paperwork properly
>>> not terribly relevant if the network continues to function ... just
>>> dont give them money
>> If nobody gives them money how are they going to continue operating?
> considering they have volunteer servers from organizations that get
> money for other reasons already, i dont think they're going to
> implode.  or if they do, you then have an argument that no one can
> defend -- "let's move to OFTC because freenode no longer exists".
> -mike


Really it's a moot point. The channel already moved. I don't think 
moving back buys us anything at this point.

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[François Revol]

(btw, Brian Jackson <iggy@theiggy.com> seems to be rejected by my smtp here:
Recipient address rejected: Domain not found)

Le 25 janv. 2011 à 23:40, Brian Jackson a écrit :
>> 
>>>>> D. Their non-profit status in the US was terminated for failure to file
>>>>> paperwork properly
>>>> not terribly relevant if the network continues to function ... just
>>>> dont give them money
>>> If nobody gives them money how are they going to continue operating?
>> considering they have volunteer servers from organizations that get
>> money for other reasons already, i dont think they're going to
>> implode.  or if they do, you then have an argument that no one can
>> defend -- "let's move to OFTC because freenode no longer exists".
>> -mike
> 
> 
> Really it's a moot point. The channel already moved. I don't think moving back buys us anything at this point.

Except people who don't go there by laziness because all their other channels are on freenode.
Raise your hands ! \o_

François.

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IRC channel movement -> FreeNode to OFTC

[François Revol]

Le 25 janv. 2011 à 23:24, Mike Frysinger a écrit :

> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 15:05, Brian Jackson wrote:
>> On 1/24/2011 1:13 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 17:44, Brian Jackson wrote:
>>>> C. They have strange rules about groups and channel ownership
>>> 
>>> ive never had a problem
>> 
>> Yeah, this was a bit vague. I think the biggest issue is that nobody that's
>> actually involved in qemu currently has any ability to do anything with the
>> #qemu@freenode. So it's either make a #therealqemu@freenode, try to convince
>> freenode that the current developers should have access, or move to a
>> network that is friendlier to it's users. Guess which one is easiest?
> 
> so from your point, it's more a matter of "freenode sucks because
> we've lost control of the official qemu channel" and "OFTC works
> because we currently have active developers who control the official
> qemu channel".  so when control is lost on OFTC, where to next ?  i
> vote for EFnet.

No but it should be possible to ask the freenode team to drop the current owners, they shall see if it's not been worked on for a while.

François.