Re: [DISCUSS] Moving from oss.sgi.com to kernel.org

[Troy McCorkell <tdm@sgi.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7022 bytes --]

On 08/06/2014 07:09 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> A few recent incidents, discoveries and comments have me concerned
> about the viability of using oss.sgi.com to host XFS deveopment and
> community support.
>
> We are very grateful for the time, effort and money that SGI has put
> into providing oss.sgi.com for us over many, many years, but these
> recent issues have brought the state of oss.sgi.com and hence it's
> viability as a host for XFS development to my immediate attention.
>
> Ultimately, as the XFS maintainer, I'm responsible for the contents
> of the pull requests sent to Linus and the code we distribute to
> users, distros and developers. That means I need to be able to trust
> that the hosting infrastructure is secure and well maintained.
>
> The short story is that I can't trust oss.sgi.com to be maintained
> and secure anymore. The recent DOS issues with oss.sgi.com made it
> clear that it is essentially unmaintained and the SGI admins don't
> have time to address issues that arise. This little snippet of the
> conversion about blocking the rogue spider causing the recent
> ftp and gitweb DOS problems is instructive:
>
> [19/07/14 09:07]<sandeen>  trev, it's you guys' box :)
> [19/07/14 09:07]<sandeen>  you get to make it work
> [19/07/14 09:07]<dchinner__>  I am not eh administrator, and if I'm forced to do this sort of thing I'll just take the content elsewhere....
> [19/07/14 09:08]<trev>  dchinner__, please do so. I don't have much time for oss anymore
>
> It should be no surprise that since this conversation I've been
> looking at what is involved in moving everything XFS off oss.sgi.com
> to kernel.org.  Right now I have the main XFS repositories up to
> date on kernel.org.  For userspace I've simply pushed the current
> trees and tags to the pre-existing repositories here:
>
> 	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsprogs-dev.git
> 	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfsdump-dev.git
> 	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git
>
> These trees currently have the same content as the trees on
> oss.sgi.com.  I may rename these as a result of discussions here
> (e.g. some people don't like the -dev suffix on the trees) so it's
> best for people to continue to use the trees on oss.sgi.com until
> this disucssion comes to a conclusion.
>
> My new kernel dev tree can be found here:
>
> 	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dgc/linux-xfs.git
>
> This is my immediate concern: this tree, regardless of anything
> else, the tree I am going to be asking Linus to pull from - it is
> now *my* master tree and the tree on oss.sgi.com will simply mirror
> that tree.
>
> For the short term, I will set up a cron job to keep the oss trees
> up to date with the trees on kernel.org. By "short-term" I mean till
> the end of the year at most. This will allow people time to change
> their workflows, update their repos, bookmarks, etc in their own
> time so hopefully not take anyone by surprise when the trees on
> oss.sgi.com stop updating. "short-term" is a rubbery concept - if
> anyone things it should be longer or shorter or whether a completely
> different approach is warranted, please speak up.
>
> Over the next few days I will move the remaining xfs trees to
> kernel.org - the historical kernel archive and documentation trees -
> and then I'll maintain them as the primary trees with the same
> short term mirroring backup.
>
> In moving these trees, we will need to update some documentation
> (e.g. the "where to get" documentation on the xfs.org wiki) and
> links, as well as place a "readme" in the gitweb main page on
> oss.sgi.com to indicate that the up-to-date XFS trees are now on
> kernel.org and documenting the drop-dead date to when the trees on
> oss will no longer be kept up to date.
>
> The only remaining issue is what to do about tarball releases for
> xfsprogs/xfsdump/fstests. We currently have a bunch of historic
> releases in the ftp release area on oss.sgi.com. I will organise a
> release directory on kernel.org for future releases (location yet to
> be confirmed), but I'm not sure what to do with the older releases.
> I'm open to suggestions here, but the limit of what I will try to
> move to kernel.org is signed tarballs that I have verified.
>
> For xfstests, I think this would be a good time to rename the
> project officially as well (i.e. to "fstests"). I'll need to talk to
> the kernel.org admins on where to locate it (pub/scm/fs/fstests is
> the best candidate, I think), but in the mean time I'll just mirror
> to oss.sgi.com as per the above so nobody needs to change anything
> until we sort out the final location/name of the tree. If anyone has
> any other ideas on this, please let me know, otherwise I'll just
> proceed with this plan.
>
> In conjunction with this source tree move, I'd also like to start the
> move the mailing list. We have ongoing spam, performance and user
> access issues with oss.sgi.com, so IMO if we are moving source trees
> off this host we should also move the mailing list to kernel.org
> infrastructure.
>
> To that end, there is a linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
> list already - it was created at the same time that the above
> kernel.org repositories were created, but we've never used it. It
> is archived here:
>
> 	http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/
>
> Moving the mailing list is going to be something that affects more
> than just the developers - we've got lots of documentation that
> points at this list and there are lots of users that are subscribed,
> read it though nntp gateways, have aliases for it, etc so we need
> a good transition plan here.
>
> I'm not sure what the best approach - perhaps just
> forwarding all email from xfs@oss.sgi.com to
> linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org will solve most transitional problems
> for users that aren't aware of the change or are following old
> documentation or "please report bug" messages from xfs_repair.
> But it means that everyone needs to subscribe to the new list
> and probably unsubscribe from the old list. I dont see how we can
> avoid that in the long term, but I'd like to minimise the pain
> as much as possible for everyone.
>
> Again, I'm open to suggestions on how to approach this and maintain
> the oss list aliases for long enough that people and search engines
> learn about the new list.
>
> I would like to make this as painless as possible for everyone. This
> isn't the only solution to the problems we have with oss.sgi.com,
> but it's the path of least effort/greatest gain for me. If anyone
> has any ideas on alternative solutions, reservations about moving to
> kernel.org infrastructure and/or suggestions to make it less painful
> for everyone, please speak up now.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
>    
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
>    

We'll make the necessary updates to oss.sgi.com to make the transition 
to vger.kernel.org
as seamless as possible.

Thanks,
Troy


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 7674 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs