wiki.laptop.org upgrade

[David Farning]

On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Ed McNierney <ed at laptop.org> wrote:
> David -
>
> I don't understand that comment.  What "several efforts" are you talking
> about?  I don't think there were several efforts to publicize this outage -
> if so, the scope of those efforts wasn't sufficient IMHO.

I was speaking of larger communication issues.

Two week ago you said that a statement would be forthcoming about the
relationship between Sugar Labs and OLPC.  If you had _only_ failed to
follow though, that would have been one thing.  Instead, you asked one
of your employees to to say that a statement would be coming.  Thereby
putting his reputation, not yours, on the line.

Last week, I contacted you in regard to Fudcon planning.  You said
that you would work it out and get back to us. I relayed that
information back to Fedora; as one would relay information from our
largest customer to our largest financially supporter and backer of
the event.  We are still waiting for that planning information.

david
>
> On 12/4/08 10:48 AM, "David Farning" <dfarning at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 5:25 AM, Ed McNierney <ed at laptop.org> wrote:
>>> Bernie -
>>>
>>> We should *never* take our public-facing Web services offline deliberately
>>> without scheduling that event in advance and sending warnings and reminders
>>> of when that scheduled maintenance will occur.  Never.  There are a lot of
>>> people who have been working very hard over the last few weeks to ensure
>>> these primary Web services are available, online, and reliable - with
>>> fallback systems in place in case something (like a software upgrade) goes
>>> wrong.
>>>
>>> This should never happen again.  We cannot be taking our servers offline
>>> during a busy period of the day (late afternoon or early evening, prime time
>>> for our major US G1G1 market) for 45 minutes while we figure out "weird
>>> problems".
>>>
>>> Perhaps I missed it, but I do not recall any email review or discussion of
>>> the value or need for either OpenID or a MediaWiki update, and I don't
>>> understand how we made the decision that either was more valuable than
>>> keeping one of our two major public sites online.
>>>
>>> Having volunteer assistance for systems administration is extremely
>>> valuable, but that assistance must be coordinated and communicated with the
>>> rest of the team.
>>>
>>
>> Is coordination and communication a one-way street:(  Several efforts
>> have been made recently to coordinate and communicate... only to be
>> met with silence.
>>
>> david
>>
>>>    - Ed
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/4/08 5:08 AM, "Bernie Innocenti" <bernie at codewiz.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ed McNierney wrote:
>>>>> What was the motivation for this upgrade?  Why did we need to take the wiki
>>>>> offline for several hours during our G1G1 promotion?  Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> It was offline for approximately 45 minutes (and it was mostly due to
>>>> a weird problem that took a while to figure out).
>>>>
>>>> The main motivation for the upgrade was installing OpenID to enable
>>>> single-sign-on across all the web applications.  Secondarily, it's
>>>> always safer to keep web applications up to date.  I also did a few
>>>> cleanups to ensure the next updates will be a little easier.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Devel mailing list
>>> Devel at lists.laptop.org
>>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>>>
>
>
>