I've created T320224 to discuss the issue of the php74 image and its fonts. I'm the one who was hassling to get the fonts back in 2019, and probably again this year. I'm sorry if it made it seem urgent! SVG Translate is an important tool, but it's not something that should dictate any overall systems on Toolforge. :-) I'd be happy to help with whatever work is required to sort this out.


On 7/10/22 08:21, Bryan Davis 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.

[0]: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T310435#8288848
[1]: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/operations/docker-images/toollabs-images/+/488764

Bryan