On 18/04/07, Mohamed Magdy
<mohamed.m.k(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>2) Any new community will essentially have to
rebuild the user account
>database from scratch. This will slow down initial growth very
>significantly. At the same time, if a designated successor
>organization already has a replicated database they can use, that
>would make things easier.
>
>
A thought: how would you ensure that this
-successor- organization would
have the same goals and way of thinking of the current foundation?
You couldn't.
The user database is something that should be freed if possible. Not
the passwords to WMF - but the fact that it's what credits
contributions to their creator. Proprietising this and using it as
leverage in blessing a chosen successor fork in case of disaster
strikes me as a bad thing - can people only prove they wrote something
if they choose the right fork to work with?
- d.
The user database is already contained within the dumps, at lest the
relevant portions. It is easy to create a script to read the last
author and recreate the account with dummy passwords. There are also the
.7z dumps which contain all of the history. It's rather
simple to write a program under SQL that reads all histories and
recreates the accounts. No problem there -- I already have tools
written that do this.
What do you folks think I have been doing for the last year? I have been
replicating Wikimedia, and I have succeeded -- with a full
suite of tools -- and to date I have manged to SELL 510K worth of
servers and tools to folks who are doing JUST THAT.
:-)
Jeff
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l