hello,
we have bought the domain toolserver.org with a view to using it for the toolserver, e.g. http://toolserver.org/~username/. if anyone has any comments (for/against), please say now.
- river.
River Tarnell wrote:
we have bought the domain toolserver.org with a view to using it for the toolserver, e.g. http://toolserver.org/~username/. if anyone has any comments (for/against), please say now.
Wonderful :)
Snowolf
2007/11/7, River Tarnell river@wikimedia.org:
hello,
we have bought the domain toolserver.org with a view to using it for the toolserver, e.g. http://toolserver.org/~username/. if anyone has any comments (for/against), please say now.
Could you set pl.toolserver.org pointing on IP 156.17.1.251
It's the machine used by WM-PL ;)
Thanks in advance
AJF/WarX
Artur Fijałkowski wrote:
It's the machine used by WM-PL ;)
Could you set pl.toolserver.org pointing on IP 156.17.1.251
I disagree, surely there should only be one Wikimedia Toolserver, it would make more sense for Wikimedia PL to use the current toolserver as this allows users to collaborate more effectively. Since this "WM-PL Toolserver" is unofficial I don't think this link should be made.
MinuteElectron.
MinuteElectron wrote:
Artur Fija??kowski wrote:
It's the machine used by WM-PL ;)
Could you set pl.toolserver.org pointing on IP 156.17.1.251
I disagree, surely there should only be one Wikimedia Toolserver, it would make more sense for Wikimedia PL to use the current toolserver as this allows users to collaborate more effectively. Since this "WM-PL Toolserver" is unofficial I don't think this link should be made.
MinuteElectron.
My appologies, I didn't realise that this was indeed official. However I still maintain that it would be better to consolidate everything into one Toolserver rather than have many different projects with no coordination.
MinuteElectron.
2007/11/7, MinuteElectron minuteelectron@googlemail.com:
My appologies, I didn't realise that this was indeed official. However I still maintain that it would be better to consolidate everything into one Toolserver rather than have many different projects with no coordination.
Well, I've just logged up to the "official" toolserver. The time between I typed my password and the prompt showed up was about 15 seconds. I took a quick look at `uptime` to check the load - it was high indeed, i got following output (after 5 seconds since pressing enter):
dodek@hemlock:~$ uptime 17:45:59 up 40 days, 18:21, 26 users, load average: 229.20, 238.11, 198.69
Pretty high, isn't it? If only it was uptime... Then, I did the same with Polish toolserver.
dodek@toolserv ~ $ uptime 17:25:02 up 241 days, 20:41, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Nice, isn't it? Every time I log there in, I'm sure I'll get enough CPU time.
And, "we don't need no coordination" :) So far, our collaboration has been in good state.
Adam Dodek Michalik wrote:
2007/11/7, MinuteElectron minuteelectron@googlemail.com:
My appologies, I didn't realise that this was indeed official. However I still maintain that it would be better to consolidate everything into one Toolserver rather than have many different projects with no coordination.
Well, I've just logged up to the "official" toolserver. The time between I typed my password and the prompt showed up was about 15 seconds. I took a quick look at `uptime` to check the load - it was high indeed, i got following output (after 5 seconds since pressing enter):
dodek@hemlock:~$ uptime 17:45:59 up 40 days, 18:21, 26 users, load average: 229.20, 238.11, 198.69
Pretty high, isn't it? If only it was uptime... Then, I did the same with Polish toolserver.
dodek@toolserv ~ $ uptime 17:25:02 up 241 days, 20:41, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Nice, isn't it? Every time I log there in, I'm sure I'll get enough CPU time.
And, "we don't need no coordination" :) So far, our collaboration has been in good state.
Perhaps if you combined your resources into one toolserver all users would be able to share these CPU cycles, rather than users having to decide whether to use the one with more human resource tools (i.e. JIRA, FishEye etc.) or one with more availability. That way users can get the best of both worlds.
MinuteElectron.
MinuteElectron wrote:
Perhaps if you combined your resources into one toolserver all users would be able to share these CPU cycles, rather than users having to decide whether to use the one with more human resource tools (i.e. JIRA, FishEye etc.) or one with more availability. That way users can get the best of both worlds.
MinuteElectron.
That's probably rather impractical, in both technical and possibly legal terms (German copyright law and Polish copyright law?), and of course we have the issue of ultimate ownership of each server here... Hemlock is heavily overloaded - allowing local servers to exist for various purposes is a Good Thing, seeing as they prevent this load from being on hemlock.
For the record, I fully support any local toolservers which are responsibly administered, and would support the use of subdomains under toolserver.org to help these. A storm seems to have been brewed in a teacup over this issue.... giving the subdomain does nobody any harm.
2007/11/7, Martin Peeks martinp23@googlemail.com:
have the issue of ultimate ownership of each server here... Hemlock is heavily overloaded - allowing local servers to exist for various purposes is a Good Thing, seeing as they prevent this load from being on hemlock.
That's true, personally I use Polish toolserver (which we call sandbox) for running bots, generating lists from xml dump or other resource-eating jobs.
On Nov 7, 2007 7:11 PM, Martin Peeks martinp23@googlemail.com wrote:
giving the subdomain does nobody any harm.
are you sure? IMHO running the polish toolserver (which is used to host content) under a domain that is owned by Wikimedia Deutschland can easily cause legal issues. Of course this could be avoided by transfering the domain to WMF. But perhaps we should first agree on if/how/why the new domain should be used.
Arne
2007/11/7, MinuteElectron minuteelectron@googlemail.com:
Artur Fijałkowski wrote:
It's the machine used by WM-PL ;)
Could you set pl.toolserver.org pointing on IP 156.17.1.251
I disagree, surely there should only be one Wikimedia Toolserver, it would make more sense for Wikimedia PL to use the current toolserver as this allows users to collaborate more effectively. Since this "WM-PL Toolserver" is unofficial I don't think this link should be made.
On this serer we keep tons of free media from our photographers and we don't have any quota and I'm able to create account for people just for uploading photos.
I hope you agree that it's not for what there is tools.wikimedia.de ;)
AJF/WarX
River Tarnell writes:
hello,
we have bought the domain toolserver.org with a view to using it for the toolserver, e.g. http://toolserver.org/~username/. if anyone has any comments (for/against), please say now.
- river.
What about adding <usrename>.users.toolserver.org alias for tools.wikimedia.de/~<username>? --VasilievVV
River Tarnell writes:
hello,
we have bought the domain toolserver.org with a view to using it for the toolserver, e.g. http://toolserver.org/~username/http://toolserver.org/%7Eusername/.
if anyone has any
comments (for/against), please say now.
Awesome!
toolserver-l@lists.wikimedia.org