On 18/05/16 18:14, Florian Snow wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > > Daniel Pocock <[email protected]> writes: > >> Can you comment on what this means from a technical perspective? >> Does autonomy mean that volunteers will be able to pick any >> arbitrary version of an application and start running it on FSFE >> hardware? > > Let me try to answer that for the blogs: We have not discussed the > details here, so what I say might not be the final solution. The > current plan is to keep the blogs on FSFE hardware and also have the > operating system maintained by system hackers. That simplifies > maintenance overall. If an OS update breaks the application running > on top of it, that's the team's problem. That way, system hackers do > not have an additional burden and the service team can take care of > the application itself. > > I see the appropriate solution as a mixture of the two scenarios you > have at Debian: The service runs on FSFE maintained servers, but if > anything, the FSFE only makes sure those servers run. If the service > breaks, it's not the FSFE's problem. So no guarantee of availability > for the server at all. > > >> ensuring all the software and dependencies are properly packaged > > Right now, the blogs run on Wordpress. It is fairly straightforward > to install (and update within the same major version). Packaging > newer versions of Wordpress would create a lot of additional work and > would cause a delay in rolling out possibly important updates.
Wordpress is available in Debian, would the packages be suitable for you? The versions are here: https://packages.qa.debian.org/w/wordpress.html jessie-backports has 4.5.2 If something is in Debian then any important updates should be supported by the security team, they are usually quite fast. > Wordpress is also pretty isolated, so I think decent documentation of > how it was set up should be sufficient here. But the team is still > forming, so we need to still discuss it. So far, that's just my > opinion. > > >> I often come across people who insist that they have to run the >> latest version of something from Git, […] > > I agree that that is a bad idea. I see the blogs as a service that is > relatively small and we can figure out how things work best here and > use that experience if and when further services run by sustaining > members are set up. Ideally, I want to move away from Wordpress, but > that is not a goal we will be able to achieve immediately. If we can > come up with a good static solution, that will reduce depencies on > external packages and simplify the setup further. > > To sum this up a bit: I think you're making valid points and I will > keep them in mind. For more complex setups, packaging might be > useful. In this particular case, I think it's not necessary, but we > will have to see what the rest of the team thinks. > I had several sites running on Drupal myself but I found that it becomes tedious dealing with PHP security bugs and such things on a regular basis. Database upgrades require some care and all of these systems have performance constraints, especially if you get slashdotted. Consequently, I moved many of the sites to a simple static hosting solution using Bootstrap and jekyll https://github.com/jekyll/jekyll https://packages.qa.debian.org/j/jekyll.html Jekyll transforms Markdown into HTML. The Markdown files can be stored in Git. Regards, Daniel _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
