[Toolserver-l] Stable server, a few questions

[River Tarnell]

Delphine Ménard wrote:
> In short, it shows that the toolserver and the tools hosted by it
> *are* important to the community (and maybe the readers out there, I
> can't figure out, really).

things like Magnus' geohack are used by readers without them really 
knowing it's from the toolserver.

> 1) do we know what tools are the most used (and hence would actually
> make most sense to migrate to a stable toolserver)

<http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/stats/usage_200711.html#TOPURLS> 
shows a few of the most used scripts.

> 2) Can we, from the above list, also say which tools are the most
> useful (ie. without which some projects would just break, I am
> especially thinking Commons here)

possibly someone could, but not me ;)

> 3) Do I undersand this right in saying that a "stable" toolserver
> would mean a way of actually integrating for real those tools into our
> daily operational monitoring (ie. it *must* work, just like the
> websites must be up)?

not really; the stable toolserver is still part of the toolserver 
cluster. the difference is that it only runs tools which have been shown 
to be stable, and aren't going to break the whole thing.

i'd also like to keep the stable server load to a reasonable level, but 
i'm not sure the Verein could support several stable servers if we need 
more.

> 4) Has anyone actually made any kind of a budget concerning what kind
> of machine we'd need, what the cost of  maintenance would be, if we
> want to make sure there is some sysadmin time devoted to it (ie. a
> real full cost things about this).

not that i know of.

	- river.