Continuing from my post on cloud@...
On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 6:21 PM Bryan Davis bd808@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 5:39 AM Taavi Väänänen hi@taavi.wtf wrote:
In general, I feel that over the last few months, quite a lot of planning and progress reporting has moved from our various public channels (most notably Phabricator and -cloud-admin on IRC) to private ones. I don't particularly like this trend.
I did a thing in my late afternoon yesterday that may have aggravated Tavvi's feelings of being left out of decision loops.
I made a decision without consulting any other Toolforge admins to add about 300MiB of fonts to the php7.4 Docker image available for use on Toolforge [0]. This decision reversed my prior blocking of this exact same request in 2019 [1]. It also goes against at least as many years of the Toolforge admins telling the Toolforge member community that we do not "bloat" the Kubernetes containers with specialty features for a small number of use cases. This reversal will complicate future decisions on such issues by introducing this easily seen counter example. I acted with good intent in the moment, but I did not act with good judgement nor consideration of my partners in maintaining the Toolforge infrastructure. For that I am truly sorry.
I would also like to apologize for treating what I was doing as "urgent" when it could have easily waited for a discussion with others either in code review or in other forums. This false urgency was counter to what I know to be the best way to treat technical decisions and it was disrespectful of my co-admins in the Toolforge environment.
I would also like to have a conversation among the Toolforge admins about how to best deal with this decision going forward. That conversation is probably better had on Phabricator or the cloud-admin mailing list than here, but it should happen and it should result in either reverting the change that I made or jointly creating updated guidelines for what is and is not acceptable in the shared Kubernetes containers while we await better methods of managing per-tool feature differences.
For the fonts themselves, should we: * Revert the change and tell svgtranslate to move back to the grid? * Propagate the change outward by making the same/similar change to all php images? * Propagate the change outward by making the same/similar change to all base images? * Let it be.
For the bigger picture of breaking our long held stance on "bloat", I would like to hear suggestions from y'all. If the font decision is to revert then maybe there is nothing to talk about here. If the fonts stay then I think there is a need to either document this as a rogue action that has been allowed to stand which should not set a precedent for the future or to come up with a rubric for what is allowed and why.
I am also open to hearing from anyone on or off list who feels that I need to make additional amends to the Toolforge admins, the Toolforge user community, or any particular individuals. I really didn't mean to make a mess, but I did and I would like to work towards correcting that as much as possible.
Bryan
PS I will be out of office until 2022-10-11, but I will try to check in on this thread in the intervening days.