Dear toolserver crowd, especially dear WMDE members among you!
tldr;
I am asking the WMDE members committed to the toolserver: What can be
a satisfactory state of the server given this strange situation of
transition?
A few thoughts about the current state of the toolserver. This e-mail
is born because I'm not satisfied: I took over the management for this
project at WMDE three months ago. The toolserver's performance is not
better than before (that's my perception). And all I am doing is
reacting to things - though I would like to be in a more active
position. This e-mail is also directed to the WMDE members whom we
promised to improve the toolserver's performance. (For transparence,
this mail is on the public list in English.)
I would like to make some of my thoughts transparent:
First of all, I'm in an awkward situation with contradictory tasks: On
the one hand, I am trying to do things to keep the toolserver running.
On the other hand my job is to set up the roadmap for its abolishment.
The first means to argue for investments into hardware. This entails
to talk about rack space and additional possibilities for power
supply, both of which are at their limits in the data centre. The
second means to propose the date of shutting down the server which is
so close that new investments seem a funny idea. Do we want new
contracts with a data centre we are about to leave next year? Also,
getting hardware there is a lenghty process as the data centre is far
away and physically maintained by others (WMF staff) who don't live
next door to it either. (To clarify: It's *not* that WMDE refuses to
spend the money. I am simply wondering if and how my work makes
sense.)
Secondly: I think that my task is fuzzy: that "the toolserver runs
(better)". What is that supposed to mean? When is this goal attained?
Has this ever been put in a way that it becomes an accomplishable
task? I refuse to struggle with undefined tasks that I'll never get
done in a satisfying way. I miss a plan! Some might say this is a
community-driven project that doesn't work like this. It develops the
way it develops and planning is impossible. But I have spent quite
some time thinking about questions like these:
* Has there ever been a systematic planning of resources for the toolserver?
* Is there any agreement about growth and limits of the toolserver?
Does it grow with growing demands? I think I implicitly understand the
toolserver is supposed to grow infinitely. This makes it hard to
stabilize the server: We only learn about its growth when the admins
inform us that the system hits its technical limits. (They did inform
us, but the future of the project was unclear already then.)
Thirdly, I have been thinking about how to go on.
* Looking at my own roadmap I think this is the moment to stop the
toolserver from growing. We might rather want to talk about strategies
to improve performance by systematically cleaning up what has moved to
Tool Labs. Or by cleaning up the remains of about 300 inactive
accounts to free space.
* When does the toolserver no longer accept new accounts? Tool Labs
shall be ready in weeks. Once it's there, I think it would be fair to
send new people to Tool Labs right away.
To cut a long story short: I am not sure what you expect me to do in
this situation. Please clarify! I don't want to deal with a task
without a clear task.
Best, Silke
--
Silke Meyer
Internes IT-Management und Projektmanagement Toolserver
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 260
http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.