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.