[clo-devel] common-lisp.net needs upgrading
The server running common-lisp.net has been running in the current configuration for a number of years now. Its Debian distribution is still Etch, which has been moved to the archives June 20th last year. As a consequence, we're locked out of even the most basic of maintenance needs: security updates. Bottom line: common-lisp.net as it is today can't be maintained anymore. We need to upgrade the system. We have two options for the system upgrade: 1. Copy the VPS and run dist-upgrade; then fix whatever falls over. 2. Create a new VPS, and make a clean start, meaning that we identify all services currently running on cl-net and we arrange for the same or equivalent services to be running on the new system. Stelian has indicated his preference is for option (2), as too much has been customized or is installed in custom locations to make a standard dist-upgrade work. I concur. Another remark from Stelian is that we could migrate one service at a time, creating subdomains (svn.common-lisp.net, git.common-lisp.net, trac...., etc) which might help future migrations. So, from where we stand now, we need to: 1) Identify all services, users and data we need to migrate 2) Find people who want to help migrate the services 3) Per component, identify a migration plan - we can start migrating services with complete migration plans 4) Test the new clean setups as well as the combination of the new setup and the old data If it's an option, I'd like the full migration to take 2 months at max from the day we start. I'd be fine with starting immediately and taking Monday April 4th as the reference day. Services that I know we're running [without looking at the box]: * Mail [MTA] * Web * Ticket tracker (RT - internal use) * Mailing lists * Subversion * Repository browsing - Subversion - Git - Darcs - CVS (do we still want to support CVS ??) * Trac * spam detection * Git deamon * rsync (what for?) * sshd * ftpd * lisppaste (on sbcl-0.9.7??) * fast-cgi * custom administration scripts Drew and I want to replace RT by OTRS which is also standard in Debian and we have good experiences with - I set one up recently for ourselves. So, I guess for now, there are two questions to be answered: 1. Do you know of any additional services that we need to migrate? 2. Who wants to help out and which services can you help migrating with? So far, I have volunteered to coordinate the effort. Bye, Erik.
On 03/29/2011 05:35 PM, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
So, I guess for now, there are two questions to be answered:
1. Do you know of any additional services that we need to migrate? No. 2. Who wants to help out and which services can you help migrating with? I can at least check whether the migration of cells-gtk happens OK. So far, I have volunteered to coordinate the effort.
-- Best regards, Peter Peter Denno National Institute of Standards and Technology, Systems Integration Division, Engineering Laboratory, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8265 Tel: +1 301-975-3595 Gaithersburg, MD, USA 20899-8265 FAX: +1 301-975-4694
"Erik" == Erik Huelsmann <ehuels@gmail.com> writes:
Erik> * Repository browsing Erik> - Subversion Erik> - Git Erik> - Darcs Erik> - CVS (do we still want to support CVS ??) I think you might want to make CVS available for those projects that are still using it but haven't (yet?) moved to something else. Cmucl will move off of cvs, but I'm not sure of the timing. It would be nice to do it after the migration when everything is working, but it might be good to make our big changes before the migration too. I would also like to have mercurial. It's currently available now, but it's just very, very old. Erik> * Trac I'd like integration of trac with git and mercurial. I think I can do that myself, but it might need admin help. Git integration didn't require admin help. (I think.) Erik> * spam detection Erik> * Git deamon Hg daemon, or whatever web server support is needed. And the hg web repo viewer (if not already included above) would be nice. Erik> * rsync (what for?) I use rsync to make backups of cmucl, oct, and f2cl, so I'd still like rsync to be available. I know I could clone them but cloning doesn't capture everything like hooks and trac config and stuff like that, or any web pages, etc. (After finding the cvs repo for cmucl was somehow corrupted a few years ago, I've been making rsync backups every month, just in case.) Erik> 1. Do you know of any additional services that we need to Erik> migrate? Other than the above, I can't think of any. Erik> 2. Who wants to help out and which services can you help Erik> migrating with? I can help test the migration with oct (git) and f2cl (hg) and trac, I'd offer to help with other stuff, but if they require admin rights, then I'd rather not do that. Thank you for bringing this up. Ray
On Mar 30, 2011, at 01:18 , Raymond Toy wrote:
"Erik" == Erik Huelsmann <ehuels@gmail.com> writes:
Erik> * Repository browsing Erik> - Subversion Erik> - Git Erik> - Darcs Erik> - CVS (do we still want to support CVS ??)
I think you might want to make CVS available for those projects that are still using it but haven't (yet?) moved to something else. Cmucl will move off of cvs, but I'm not sure of the timing. It would be nice to do it after the migration when everything is working, but it might be good to make our big changes before the migration too.
I second that. I have little time to spare in converting everything to git (or darcs, or whatever). Just keep CVS and let people live with it. -- Marco Antoniotti
Thanks for the feedback. On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Marco Antoniotti <marcoxa@cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
On Mar 30, 2011, at 01:18 , Raymond Toy wrote:
> "Erik" == Erik Huelsmann <ehuels@gmail.com> writes:
Erik> * Repository browsing Erik> - Subversion Erik> - Git Erik> - Darcs Erik> - CVS (do we still want to support CVS ??)
I think you might want to make CVS available for those projects that are still using it but haven't (yet?) moved to something else. Cmucl will move off of cvs, but I'm not sure of the timing. It would be nice to do it after the migration when everything is working, but it might be good to make our big changes before the migration too.
I second that. I have little time to spare in converting everything to git (or darcs, or whatever). Just keep CVS and let people live with it.
Let me explain that I wasn't trying to deny anybody his version control tool or pressure into migration. The main reason I was asking the question is because of the reputation of cvsd to have lots of security issues involved with running the daemon. The question would have been better phrased: do we need the cvsd pserver daemon (if only for anonymous access). Given your answers, I'll take that as a "yes". Thanks again for your responses. Bye, Erik.
Erik Huelsman writes:
The server running common-lisp.net has been running in the current configuration for a number of years now. Its Debian distribution is still Etch, which has been moved to the archives June 20th last year. As a consequence, we're locked out of even the most basic of maintenance needs: security updates.
Bottom line: common-lisp.net as it is today can't be maintained anymore. We need to upgrade the system.
Urp, yes, that sounds like a necessity.
We have two options for the system upgrade:
1. Copy the VPS and run dist-upgrade; then fix whatever falls over. 2. Create a new VPS, and make a clean start, meaning that we identify all services currently running on cl-net and we arrange for the same or equivalent services to be running on the new system.
Stelian has indicated his preference is for option (2), as too much has been customized or is installed in custom locations to make a standard dist-upgrade work. I concur.
Another remark from Stelian is that we could migrate one service at a time, creating subdomains (svn.common-lisp.net, git.common-lisp.net, trac...., etc) which might help future migrations.
Option 2 and creating subdomains for individual services sound like, possibly, the right thing. [ SNIP ]
Services that I know we're running [without looking at the box]:
* Mail [MTA] * Web * Ticket tracker (RT - internal use) * Mailing lists * Subversion * Repository browsing - Subversion - Git - Darcs - CVS (do we still want to support CVS ??)
How many projects do we have that use CVS rather than another version control system? I know that none of the ones I am directly involved in use anything buy CVS. Not really a problem for Gamelib, I can definitely cut off existing version history and start over with a clean check-in into something else, but I am pretty sure there are in-flight checks for NOCtool. So if we don't want to support CVS, we better provide a conversion path for projects that rely on it.
* Trac * spam detection * Git deamon * rsync (what for?) * sshd * ftpd * lisppaste (on sbcl-0.9.7??) * fast-cgi * custom administration scripts
Drew and I want to replace RT by OTRS which is also standard in Debian and we have good experiences with - I set one up recently for ourselves.
So, I guess for now, there are two questions to be answered:
1. Do you know of any additional services that we need to migrate? 2. Who wants to help out and which services can you help migrating with?
I can probably find time to poke mail, mailing lists and maybe web, but this all depends rather heavily on when we're considering doing it (I won't really have any spare time until mid-May, what with work and everything). //Ingvar
participants (5)
-
Erik Huelsmann -
Ingvar -
Marco Antoniotti -
Peter Denno -
Raymond Toy