On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 at 02:53, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 09:36 Mariatta Wijaya <mariatta.wij...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I also wonder though, instead of hosting it ourselves, can't we just keep >> daily backups of the signed CLA? It's basically a list of GitHub usernames? >> > > >> Perhaps that would be an easier task than hosting and maintaining it. >> > > I think the key question is what sort of resiliency would we have in > making this potential change? If we can backup the data regularly so that > if we have to quickly turn around and either stand up our own instance of > cla-assistant or tweak our CLA bot then I would assume this would take care > of the biggest concerns people have. Basically we need to have a plan in > place if the hosted cla-assistant disappeared today without notice. >
Given the infrastructure that the PSF has already set up to handle the modern incarnation of PyPI, I suspect adding our own instance of cla-assistant to that (and hence being able to easily integrate it with the PSF's existing monitoring and management tools, like DataDog) will actually be easier than devising and managing a custom cla-assistant-specific disaster recovery plan. 'tis the beauty and wonder of combining traditional three-tier open source web applications with an automated app management platform like Kubernetes :) Cheers, Nick. P.S. See https://p.datadoghq.com/sb/7dc8b3250-85dcf667bd for the current PyPI/PSF metrics dashboard. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
_______________________________________________ core-workflow mailing list -- core-workflow@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to core-workflow-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mm3/mailman3/lists/core-workflow.python.org/ This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
