That all seems logical, appropriate, and aligned with our current
procedures. So..what's the problem?
-greg aka varnent
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <marc(a)uberbox.org> wrote:
On 07/03/2014 07:12 AM, James Salsman wrote:
Can someone please explain to me why the
Foundation can't give
User:Dispenser 24 TB on Tool Labs?
To make matters a bit clearer, Dispenser's current Reflinks tool (and
all his others) do not need 24T of storage (nor would toolserver have
had that storage to give him, even if it were possible). His demands for
the storage are for a new version of the tool he is yet to write that is
meant to actually cache the external link's webpages - a request he has
yet to actually make to WMF Engineering. He was never told no; he was
told (by me, inter alia) that he'd need to make a proposal with
explanation and rationale before we would commit several thousand
dollars of resources towards an unspecified, future project of his
(especially one that is likely to need Legal to look into).
That he has not in fact moved his existing tools to Tool Labs is
unrelated to this; there is no technical impediment to him running his
tools in Labs today if he chooses to.
Also, 24T is a significant chunk of the space available to Labs in
general; storage is nowhere near as inexpensive in our context as would
be with off-the-shelf customer-grade disks. There's nothing that
prevents us from allocating significant resources to a project that
needs it (to wit: open street maps tile generator) but we're not going
to do that site unseen and without supervision.
-- Marc
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>