Merlissimo wrote:
Perhaps it is useful to summarize reasons why
toolserver users are not
able to change to tool/bot labs. I added my main reasons. Perhaps other
can add their reasons, too? (Mabe we should also add this list to the
wiki page)
temporary blockers
* no replication of wikimedia wiki databases
** joining of user databases with wiki databases
* no support for script execution dependency (on ts: currently done by sge)
* no support for servlets
missing support blockers
* no support for new users not familar with unix based systems
* no transparent updating of packages with security problems/bug
permanent blockers
* license problems (i wrote code at work for my company and reuse parts
for my bot framework. I have not the right to declare this code as open
source which is needed by labs policy.)
* no DaB.
I think I'd add "general direction of centralizing everything under a single
Wikimedia Foundation is a bad idea" as a permanent blocker. Maybe there's a
reasonable case for why deprecating the Toolserver and creating Wikimedia
Labs is a great idea, but I don't see it yet.
I don't see why each (Wikimedia) chapter shouldn't have its own replica of
the databases. We want free content to be free (and re-used and re-mixed and
whatever else). If you're going to invest in infrastructure, I think it
makes more sense to bolster replication support than try to compete with the
Toolserver.
That said, pooled resources can sometimes be a smart move to save on
investments such as hardware. Chapters working together is not a bad thing
(I believe some chapters donated to Wikimedia Deutschland for Toolserver
support in the past). But the broader point is that users should be very
cautious of the general direction that a Wikimedia (Foundation) Labs is
headed and ask whether it's really a good idea iff it means the destruction
of free-standing projects such as the Toolserver.
MZMcBride