Relations with freenode and wikimedia

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
28 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Petr Bena
Hi,

One developer recently complained about some freenode policies,
specifically that wiki projects (wikipedia etc has some kind of
exception) are no longer allowed to be hosted on freenode network,
which is supposed to host only opensource projects. It's fact that as
the wikimedia project is becoming more large the freenode is getting
less and less suitable. Right now there is a page [1] where are
discussed other options for IRC. One of the options is to leave
freenode and set up own wikimedia IRC network, which has lot of
benefits but also lot of issues (moving to another network is
complicated given to number of channels and users).

I would like to propose another idea, and that is, instead of leaving
freenode, to improve the relations with the freenode staff and
eventually ask them to change some of the restrictions to fit better
to our needs. On other hand we could offer them various services in
return, for example the wikimedia foundation has made few donations to
freenode in past. If we consider the amount of hardware resources we
have, it shouldn't be problem to offer freenode for example a
dedicated or virtual server running on our cluster, which could host
one or more of their ircd servers (our technical / operation community
is far larger than freenode's so there should be absolutely no problem
setting this up and keeping it maintained). This would be perfect kind
of long term support to freenode network in return for their services
they offer to wikimedia project and it could eventually improve the
relations with freenode so they would allow to improve some of their
policies, specifically:

- The wiki-projects (which are often related to mediawiki software or
developers, even some other companies / projects are affiliated with
MW development) should be allowed to be hosted on freenode, so that
the community of these projects shouldn't find it so hard to reach the
technical support of mediawiki (right now they would have to be on
multiple networks given that #mediawiki is hosted on freenode, but
wiki projects in general are not allowed to be hosted there)

- There is a limit defined by freenode to have maximal number of 4
Group contacts, who are people dealing with cloaks and various staff
related issues. The wikimedia project currently have 4 Group contacts,
so it's quite impossible to enlarge this team. Right now it takes some
time for cloak requests to be processed and in future this number of
people could not be sufficient. Freenode should make it possible for
large projects like wikimedia to have some better options.

- Technical channels have lot of services like nagios bots, these bots
are getting often killed for flooding, because they need to send a lot
of text in short time, it should be possible to define exceptions for
these services to allow sending bigger amount of data in channels

What do you think of this?



<refs>

1 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/Hosts

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Sébastien Santoro
Good morning,

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> One developer recently complained about some freenode policies,
> specifically that wiki projects (wikipedia etc has some kind of
> exception) are no longer allowed to be hosted on freenode network,
> which is supposed to host only opensource projects.
> It's fact that as
> the wikimedia project is becoming more large the freenode is getting
> less and less suitable.
You have the right to say anything, you've the duty to prove it.

Could you support your three claims:
(i) only open source projects are allowed on Freenode
(ii) Wikimedia has an exception
(iii) Freenode can't scale with Wikimedia projects growth

According http://freenode.net/policy.shtml, are accepted:
"Non-Software-Related Peer-Directed Project. Per the PDPC charter,
channels which serve projects combining open, informal participation
and broadly-licensed, widely-disseminated creative output are
considered to be on-topic. If you believe your non-software project
may meet the criteria for a non-software peer-directed project, please
consult a staffer or email support at freenode dot net. "

> (...)
> I would like to propose another idea, and that is, instead of leaving
> freenode, to improve the relations with the freenode staff and
> eventually ask them to change some of the restrictions to fit better
> to our needs
Please provide us a list of issues we currently have and the solutions.

I fear you're doing a bold move made under false assumptions.
Our relations with the Freenode staff seems to be rather good and the
current statu quo works well.

>  On other hand we could offer them various services in
> return, for example the wikimedia foundation has made few donations to
> freenode in past. If we consider the amount of hardware resources we
> have, it shouldn't be problem to offer freenode for example a
> dedicated or virtual server running on our cluster, which could host
> one or more of their ircd servers (our technical / operation community
> is far larger than freenode's so there should be absolutely no problem
> setting this up and keeping it maintained).
Do you have any idea how much maintenance requires an IRC server?

Do you have any idea of the impact (DDoS flood for example) an IRC
server have to a network?

Do you have any idea of the skills, the time, the social contacts and
the energy required to maintain an IRC server?

Do you know how many corporates, universities linked to networks like
UnderNet, EFnet, IRCNet and Dalnet decided to not fight anymore those
battles and canceled their support?

I know we're on Freenode, a quieter network, but still... these are
experiences to take in account to avoid to find problems.

> of long term support to freenode network in return for their services
> they offer to wikimedia project and it could eventually improve the
> relations with freenode so they would allow to improve some of their
> policies, specifically:
>
> - The wiki-projects (which are often related to mediawiki software or
> developers, even some other companies / projects are affiliated with
> MW development) should be allowed to be hosted on freenode, so that
> the community of these projects shouldn't find it so hard to reach the
> technical support of mediawiki (right now they would have to be on
> multiple networks given that #mediawiki is hosted on freenode, but
> wiki projects in general are not allowed to be hosted there)
Please give us two samples of wiki projects who wanted to be on
Freenode but couldn't.

Please back your claim with prove people from any wiki would want:
(i) to be on IRC
(ii) to have a regular channel
(iii) to have this regular channel on the Freenode network
(iv) don't already have it / be denied / etc.

> - There is a limit defined by freenode to have maximal number of 4
> Group contacts, who are people dealing with cloaks and various staff
> related issues. The wikimedia project currently have 4 Group contacts,
> so it's quite impossible to enlarge this team. Right now it takes some
> time for cloak requests to be processed and in future this number of
> people could not be sufficient. Freenode should make it possible for
> large projects like wikimedia to have some better options.
What the IRC Group think about that?

> - Technical channels have lot of services like nagios bots, these bots
> are getting often killed for flooding, because they need to send a lot
> of text in short time, it should be possible to define exceptions for
> these services to allow sending bigger amount of data in channels
They're automatically killed or by ircops?

If it's the first, we should configure them correctly, as it's an issue.

For example, look the eggdrop source code.There are 3 messages queues,
one "quick" processing virtually immediately, the "serv" as a regular
rate and the "help" which is throttled to avoid flood. Those settings
work since 1996. We could go read them, test them and recommend them
as best practices.

--
Sébastien Santoro aka Dereckson
http://www.dereckson.be/

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Petr Bena
Hi, thanks for your response!

First of all, I am not the guy who complained regarding the fact wikis
are not accepted, I am just proposing another idea, but here are
answers:


On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Sébastien Santoro
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Good morning,
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> One developer recently complained about some freenode policies,
>> specifically that wiki projects (wikipedia etc has some kind of
>> exception) are no longer allowed to be hosted on freenode network,
>> which is supposed to host only opensource projects.
>> It's fact that as
>> the wikimedia project is becoming more large the freenode is getting
>> less and less suitable.
> You have the right to say anything, you've the duty to prove it.
>
> Could you support your three claims:
> (i) only open source projects are allowed on Freenode
> (ii) Wikimedia has an exception
> (iii) Freenode can't scale with Wikimedia projects growth
>

1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/Hosts#See_also there is a reference
2: Wikipedia channels are allowed, the mere fact that others are not
makes it an exception
3: I never said that

> According http://freenode.net/policy.shtml, are accepted:
> "Non-Software-Related Peer-Directed Project. Per the PDPC charter,
> channels which serve projects combining open, informal participation
> and broadly-licensed, widely-disseminated creative output are
> considered to be on-topic. If you believe your non-software project
> may meet the criteria for a non-software peer-directed project, please
> consult a staffer or email support at freenode dot net. "
>
>> (...)
>> I would like to propose another idea, and that is, instead of leaving
>> freenode, to improve the relations with the freenode staff and
>> eventually ask them to change some of the restrictions to fit better
>> to our needs
> Please provide us a list of issues we currently have and the solutions.
>
> I fear you're doing a bold move made under false assumptions.
> Our relations with the Freenode staff seems to be rather good and the
> current statu quo works well.
>

I already provided this list, just read either the
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/Hosts#See_also or the previous
e-mail

>>  On other hand we could offer them various services in
>> return, for example the wikimedia foundation has made few donations to
>> freenode in past. If we consider the amount of hardware resources we
>> have, it shouldn't be problem to offer freenode for example a
>> dedicated or virtual server running on our cluster, which could host
>> one or more of their ircd servers (our technical / operation community
>> is far larger than freenode's so there should be absolutely no problem
>> setting this up and keeping it maintained).
> Do you have any idea how much maintenance requires an IRC server?
>

Yes, I am an irc operator on one

> Do you have any idea of the impact (DDoS flood for example) an IRC
> server have to a network?
>

Yes

> Do you have any idea of the skills, the time, the social contacts and
> the energy required to maintain an IRC server?
>

Yes

> Do you know how many corporates, universities linked to networks like
> UnderNet, EFnet, IRCNet and Dalnet decided to not fight anymore those
> battles and canceled their support?
>

No, neither I understand why you ask that

> I know we're on Freenode, a quieter network, but still... these are
> experiences to take in account to avoid to find problems.
>
>> of long term support to freenode network in return for their services
>> they offer to wikimedia project and it could eventually improve the
>> relations with freenode so they would allow to improve some of their
>> policies, specifically:
>>
>> - The wiki-projects (which are often related to mediawiki software or
>> developers, even some other companies / projects are affiliated with
>> MW development) should be allowed to be hosted on freenode, so that
>> the community of these projects shouldn't find it so hard to reach the
>> technical support of mediawiki (right now they would have to be on
>> multiple networks given that #mediawiki is hosted on freenode, but
>> wiki projects in general are not allowed to be hosted there)
> Please give us two samples of wiki projects who wanted to be on
> Freenode but couldn't.
>

Again, I am not the guy complaining about this, I just come with
another idea than proposed on wiki page, ask the guy who had troubles
registering their project on freenode.

> Please back your claim with prove people from any wiki would want:
> (i) to be on IRC
> (ii) to have a regular channel
> (iii) to have this regular channel on the Freenode network
> (iv) don't already have it / be denied / etc.
>
>> - There is a limit defined by freenode to have maximal number of 4
>> Group contacts, who are people dealing with cloaks and various staff
>> related issues. The wikimedia project currently have 4 Group contacts,
>> so it's quite impossible to enlarge this team. Right now it takes some
>> time for cloak requests to be processed and in future this number of
>> people could not be sufficient. Freenode should make it possible for
>> large projects like wikimedia to have some better options.
> What the IRC Group think about that?
>
>> - Technical channels have lot of services like nagios bots, these bots
>> are getting often killed for flooding, because they need to send a lot
>> of text in short time, it should be possible to define exceptions for
>> these services to allow sending bigger amount of data in channels
> They're automatically killed or by ircops?
>

They are killed by limits (ircd)

> If it's the first, we should configure them correctly, as it's an issue.
>
> For example, look the eggdrop source code.There are 3 messages queues,
> one "quick" processing virtually immediately, the "serv" as a regular
> rate and the "help" which is throttled to avoid flood. Those settings
> work since 1996. We could go read them, test them and recommend them
> as best practices.
>

I already proposed this once, response by people who operate these
bots was: "there should be possibility to give some exception to
these."

On other hand, the network services (u:lines) do have this exception.
I don't think anyone would like to wait for chanserv 40 seconds to
print its help. Just as when something went wrong on production there
is a little point in waiting 2 minutes for nagios to print the
messages.

> --
> Sébastien Santoro aka Dereckson
> http://www.dereckson.be/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


Your e-mail is definitely partially correct, but keep in mind that I
am proposing wikimedia operation to offer a long term donation to
freenode in form of server hosting, and I still don't see a simple
reason why not to do that.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Faidon Liambotis
In reply to this post by Petr Bena
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 09:35:56AM +0200, Petr Bena wrote:

> One developer recently complained about some freenode policies,
> specifically that wiki projects (wikipedia etc has some kind of
> exception) are no longer allowed to be hosted on freenode network,
> which is supposed to host only opensource projects. It's fact that as
> the wikimedia project is becoming more large the freenode is getting
> less and less suitable. Right now there is a page [1] where are
> discussed other options for IRC. One of the options is to leave
> freenode and set up own wikimedia IRC network, which has lot of
> benefits but also lot of issues (moving to another network is
> complicated given to number of channels and users).

Setting up and properly maintaining an IRC network is extremely
complicated.  We really *really* shouldn't do that, esp. since there is
no reason for us to do so, when there are other open networks around.

Even if the situation with freenode doesn't work out (which I think it
will), we could perhaps reach out to OFTC, an alternative IRC network
where some free software projects have fled to (there was discussions in
the past to merge freenode/OFTC but those proved to be unfruitful)a.

Regards,
Faidon

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Petr Bena
But I am not talking about creating a new network, but providing some
of our resources to freenode. They would likely operate and manage it
without assistance from wmf ops.

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Faidon Liambotis <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 09:35:56AM +0200, Petr Bena wrote:
>> One developer recently complained about some freenode policies,
>> specifically that wiki projects (wikipedia etc has some kind of
>> exception) are no longer allowed to be hosted on freenode network,
>> which is supposed to host only opensource projects. It's fact that as
>> the wikimedia project is becoming more large the freenode is getting
>> less and less suitable. Right now there is a page [1] where are
>> discussed other options for IRC. One of the options is to leave
>> freenode and set up own wikimedia IRC network, which has lot of
>> benefits but also lot of issues (moving to another network is
>> complicated given to number of channels and users).
>
> Setting up and properly maintaining an IRC network is extremely
> complicated.  We really *really* shouldn't do that, esp. since there is
> no reason for us to do so, when there are other open networks around.
>
> Even if the situation with freenode doesn't work out (which I think it
> will), we could perhaps reach out to OFTC, an alternative IRC network
> where some free software projects have fled to (there was discussions in
> the past to merge freenode/OFTC but those proved to be unfruitful)a.
>
> Regards,
> Faidon
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Petr Bena
In reply to this post by Faidon Liambotis
On other hand I disagree that maintaining an irc network is so
complicated, given that we have so many volunteers who would
eventually help with that. But staying on freenode would make it
easier for us, that's true.

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Faidon Liambotis <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 09:35:56AM +0200, Petr Bena wrote:
>> One developer recently complained about some freenode policies,
>> specifically that wiki projects (wikipedia etc has some kind of
>> exception) are no longer allowed to be hosted on freenode network,
>> which is supposed to host only opensource projects. It's fact that as
>> the wikimedia project is becoming more large the freenode is getting
>> less and less suitable. Right now there is a page [1] where are
>> discussed other options for IRC. One of the options is to leave
>> freenode and set up own wikimedia IRC network, which has lot of
>> benefits but also lot of issues (moving to another network is
>> complicated given to number of channels and users).
>
> Setting up and properly maintaining an IRC network is extremely
> complicated.  We really *really* shouldn't do that, esp. since there is
> no reason for us to do so, when there are other open networks around.
>
> Even if the situation with freenode doesn't work out (which I think it
> will), we could perhaps reach out to OFTC, an alternative IRC network
> where some free software projects have fled to (there was discussions in
> the past to merge freenode/OFTC but those proved to be unfruitful)a.
>
> Regards,
> Faidon
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

K. Peachey-2
In reply to this post by Petr Bena
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
> But I am not talking about creating a new network, but providing some
> of our resources to freenode. They would likely operate and manage it
> without assistance from wmf ops.

(Last I saw) Freenode wants full root access on the boxes, Something
that ops more than likely won't want to do if its sitting on our
networks.


On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On other hand I disagree that maintaining an irc network is so
> complicated, given that we have so many volunteers who would
> eventually help with that. But staying on freenode would make it
> easier for us, that's true.

One of the reason the ops (Tim S. especially) like our current IRC
setup is because its turn on and forget about it for a few years, That
would more than likely not be if the case if we started opening up for
people to talk on it and etc, where as we currently have a fully
functioning and "fine" system operating system (which no one has
really given any reasons against really, apart from the group contacts
thing, which i see as a non issue at current).

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Emeric Vallespi
How many users does wikimedia's channels represent ?
It becomes more complicated to manage an IRC Network when it's necessary to multiply servers but it's not

Le 21 juin 2012 à 14:24, "K. Peachey" <[hidden email]> a écrit :

> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> But I am not talking about creating a new network, but providing some
>> of our resources to freenode. They would likely operate and manage it
>> without assistance from wmf ops.
>
> (Last I saw) Freenode wants full root access on the boxes, Something
> that ops more than likely won't want to do if its sitting on our
> networks.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On other hand I disagree that maintaining an irc network is so
>> complicated, given that we have so many volunteers who would
>> eventually help with that. But staying on freenode would make it
>> easier for us, that's true.
>
> One of the reason the ops (Tim S. especially) like our current IRC
> setup is because its turn on and forget about it for a few years, That
> would more than likely not be if the case if we started opening up for
> people to talk on it and etc, where as we currently have a fully
> functioning and "fine" system operating system (which no one has
> really given any reasons against really, apart from the group contacts
> thing, which i see as a non issue at current).
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Petr Bena
Petr Bena wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Sébastien Santoro
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> One developer recently complained about some freenode policies,
>>> specifically that wiki projects (wikipedia etc has some kind of
>>> exception) are no longer allowed to be hosted on freenode network,
>>> which is supposed to host only opensource projects.
>>> It's fact that as
>>> the wikimedia project is becoming more large the freenode is getting
>>> less and less suitable.
>> You have the right to say anything, you've the duty to prove it.
>>
>> Could you support your three claims:
>> (i) only open source projects are allowed on Freenode
>> (ii) Wikimedia has an exception
>> (iii) Freenode can't scale with Wikimedia projects growth
>
> 1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/Hosts#See_also there is a reference
> 2: Wikipedia channels are allowed, the mere fact that others are not
> makes it an exception
> 3: I never said that

Regarding that Meta-Wiki link, you're referencing a footnote that reads:

---
Recent rejection email sent to a wiki project: "Whilst I'm sure that your
project has many admirable goals, it does not appear to be centric to the
concepts of free software, and so is not topical for our network. We are
imposing stricter criteria on new project registrations lately due to some
other registered groups having to be recinded. With this in mind, I'm afraid
we will need to reject this grf, and if you wish to use freenode for your
IRC channel, suggest that you take the "##" channel instead."
---

This may be true, but even if so, I don't think it's really relevant.

As I understand it, freenode has no issue hosting Wikimedia channels (and
actively encourages it, even). Back when Rob was alive, he offered Tim an o
line to try to get _more_ of Wikimedia's channels (in particular, the RC
feeds that live on irc.wikimedia.org) on freenode.

This particular discussion (regarding using irc.wikimedia.org for chat) has
come up a few times and isn't really worth re-hashing, I don't think.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Emeric Vallespi
In reply to this post by Emeric Vallespi
Sorry, typing error. Suite inline.

Le 21 juin 2012 à 14:41, Emeric Vallespi <[hidden email]> a écrit :

> How many users does wikimedia's channels represent ?
> It becomes more complicated to manage an IRC Network when it's necessary to multiply servers however it's not very complicated but resource and time intensive.

--
Emeric

>
> Le 21 juin 2012 à 14:24, "K. Peachey" <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> But I am not talking about creating a new network, but providing some
>>> of our resources to freenode. They would likely operate and manage it
>>> without assistance from wmf ops.
>>
>> (Last I saw) Freenode wants full root access on the boxes, Something
>> that ops more than likely won't want to do if its sitting on our
>> networks.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On other hand I disagree that maintaining an irc network is so
>>> complicated, given that we have so many volunteers who would
>>> eventually help with that. But staying on freenode would make it
>>> easier for us, that's true.
>>
>> One of the reason the ops (Tim S. especially) like our current IRC
>> setup is because its turn on and forget about it for a few years, That
>> would more than likely not be if the case if we started opening up for
>> people to talk on it and etc, where as we currently have a fully
>> functioning and "fine" system operating system (which no one has
>> really given any reasons against really, apart from the group contacts
>> thing, which i see as a non issue at current).
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikitech-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Petr Bena
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
I wasn't talking about wikimedia channels but wiki projects (non
wikimedia) in relation with recent complaint from someone else
(mediawiki dev who wanted to open a channel for his wiki on freenode)

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:55 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Petr Bena wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Sébastien Santoro
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> One developer recently complained about some freenode policies,
>>>> specifically that wiki projects (wikipedia etc has some kind of
>>>> exception) are no longer allowed to be hosted on freenode network,
>>>> which is supposed to host only opensource projects.
>>>> It's fact that as
>>>> the wikimedia project is becoming more large the freenode is getting
>>>> less and less suitable.
>>> You have the right to say anything, you've the duty to prove it.
>>>
>>> Could you support your three claims:
>>> (i) only open source projects are allowed on Freenode
>>> (ii) Wikimedia has an exception
>>> (iii) Freenode can't scale with Wikimedia projects growth
>>
>> 1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/Hosts#See_also there is a reference
>> 2: Wikipedia channels are allowed, the mere fact that others are not
>> makes it an exception
>> 3: I never said that
>
> Regarding that Meta-Wiki link, you're referencing a footnote that reads:
>
> ---
> Recent rejection email sent to a wiki project: "Whilst I'm sure that your
> project has many admirable goals, it does not appear to be centric to the
> concepts of free software, and so is not topical for our network. We are
> imposing stricter criteria on new project registrations lately due to some
> other registered groups having to be recinded. With this in mind, I'm afraid
> we will need to reject this grf, and if you wish to use freenode for your
> IRC channel, suggest that you take the "##" channel instead."
> ---
>
> This may be true, but even if so, I don't think it's really relevant.
>
> As I understand it, freenode has no issue hosting Wikimedia channels (and
> actively encourages it, even). Back when Rob was alive, he offered Tim an o
> line to try to get _more_ of Wikimedia's channels (in particular, the RC
> feeds that live on irc.wikimedia.org) on freenode.
>
> This particular discussion (regarding using irc.wikimedia.org for chat) has
> come up a few times and isn't really worth re-hashing, I don't think.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Petr Bena
In reply to this post by K. Peachey-2
Definitely it would be a bad idea to merge RC feed irc with some irc
for people. If there was any new network it would be probably
configured from scratch and unrelated to ratircd RC feed run on.
Anyway I don't think that would happen. This isn't even discussion
about that. We are discussing option to donate server to freenode here
:-)

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:24 PM, K. Peachey <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> But I am not talking about creating a new network, but providing some
>> of our resources to freenode. They would likely operate and manage it
>> without assistance from wmf ops.
>
> (Last I saw) Freenode wants full root access on the boxes, Something
> that ops more than likely won't want to do if its sitting on our
> networks.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On other hand I disagree that maintaining an irc network is so
>> complicated, given that we have so many volunteers who would
>> eventually help with that. But staying on freenode would make it
>> easier for us, that's true.
>
> One of the reason the ops (Tim S. especially) like our current IRC
> setup is because its turn on and forget about it for a few years, That
> would more than likely not be if the case if we started opening up for
> people to talk on it and etc, where as we currently have a fully
> functioning and "fine" system operating system (which no one has
> really given any reasons against really, apart from the group contacts
> thing, which i see as a non issue at current).
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Gregory Varnum-2
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
Obviously some developers do feel that it's worth discussing. Not sure that we need to stop them (Lord knows we discuss other topics to great lengths). However I invite you to sit this one out if you disagree. Just don't cut others off in the process.

As a good steward of the wiki community I think we as Wikimedia should care if Freenode no longer supports wikis.

Before I posted the page on meta there was discussion of a mtg during unconference at Wikimania. That was because of bot issues - which wm does care about - the wiki rejections was an additional catalyst.

I'm waiting for confirmation on if they are indeed no longer accepting wikis or if there was just confusion with some apps. Although I'm hearing others are having problems as well. Also, my understanding is they don't see wikimedia channels as an exception but rather allowed because of MediaWiki being wm's qualifying open source software project. So our status as an exception depends on if you're in the camp that says MediaWiki is core to WM's work or not.

I'm not sure it's in Freenodes best interest to grow to Wikimedia's needs or requests - but I'd be thrilled if they did and am optimistic they may if we ask and explain why. I'm also not yet sold on WM having their own as being the best solution - but I think it's worth discussing. Is there documentation of the last several discussions that apparently took place on this topic which folks can look over? Adding it to that wiki page may help this from coming up yet again.

Either way - I fail to see how it hurts us to discuss this and considering talking to Freenode about our concerns. I can't imagine they'd be hostile to that conversation happening.

-Greg

____________
Sent from my iPhone. Apologies for any typos. A more detailed response may be sent later.

On Jun 21, 2012, at 8:55 AM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Petr Bena wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Sébastien Santoro
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> One developer recently complained about some freenode policies,
>>>> specifically that wiki projects (wikipedia etc has some kind of
>>>> exception) are no longer allowed to be hosted on freenode network,
>>>> which is supposed to host only opensource projects.
>>>> It's fact that as
>>>> the wikimedia project is becoming more large the freenode is getting
>>>> less and less suitable.
>>> You have the right to say anything, you've the duty to prove it.
>>>
>>> Could you support your three claims:
>>> (i) only open source projects are allowed on Freenode
>>> (ii) Wikimedia has an exception
>>> (iii) Freenode can't scale with Wikimedia projects growth
>>
>> 1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC/Hosts#See_also there is a reference
>> 2: Wikipedia channels are allowed, the mere fact that others are not
>> makes it an exception
>> 3: I never said that
>
> Regarding that Meta-Wiki link, you're referencing a footnote that reads:
>
> ---
> Recent rejection email sent to a wiki project: "Whilst I'm sure that your
> project has many admirable goals, it does not appear to be centric to the
> concepts of free software, and so is not topical for our network. We are
> imposing stricter criteria on new project registrations lately due to some
> other registered groups having to be recinded. With this in mind, I'm afraid
> we will need to reject this grf, and if you wish to use freenode for your
> IRC channel, suggest that you take the "##" channel instead."
> ---
>
> This may be true, but even if so, I don't think it's really relevant.
>
> As I understand it, freenode has no issue hosting Wikimedia channels (and
> actively encourages it, even). Back when Rob was alive, he offered Tim an o
> line to try to get _more_ of Wikimedia's channels (in particular, the RC
> feeds that live on irc.wikimedia.org) on freenode.
>
> This particular discussion (regarding using irc.wikimedia.org for chat) has
> come up a few times and isn't really worth re-hashing, I don't think.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Gregory Varnum-2
In reply to this post by Petr Bena
Is anyone from Freenode on this list or able to respond? I feel like they'd be open to the conversation and hearing general thoughts from a designated group even before we know what carrot we'll offer.

If any requests are a non-starter then it may not matter if we can offer resources or not.

I think investigating networks more receptive both to our bot needs and accepting our partner wikis.

-Greg

____________
Sent from my iPhone. Apologies for any typos. A more detailed response may be sent later.

On Jun 21, 2012, at 9:26 AM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Definitely it would be a bad idea to merge RC feed irc with some irc
> for people. If there was any new network it would be probably
> configured from scratch and unrelated to ratircd RC feed run on.
> Anyway I don't think that would happen. This isn't even discussion
> about that. We are discussing option to donate server to freenode here
> :-)
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 2:24 PM, K. Peachey <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> But I am not talking about creating a new network, but providing some
>>> of our resources to freenode. They would likely operate and manage it
>>> without assistance from wmf ops.
>>
>> (Last I saw) Freenode wants full root access on the boxes, Something
>> that ops more than likely won't want to do if its sitting on our
>> networks.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Petr Bena <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On other hand I disagree that maintaining an irc network is so
>>> complicated, given that we have so many volunteers who would
>>> eventually help with that. But staying on freenode would make it
>>> easier for us, that's true.
>>
>> One of the reason the ops (Tim S. especially) like our current IRC
>> setup is because its turn on and forget about it for a few years, That
>> would more than likely not be if the case if we started opening up for
>> people to talk on it and etc, where as we currently have a fully
>> functioning and "fine" system operating system (which no one has
>> really given any reasons against really, apart from the group contacts
>> thing, which i see as a non issue at current).
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikitech-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Chad
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Mr. Gregory Varnum
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Is anyone from Freenode on this list or able to respond? I feel like they'd be open to the conversation and hearing general thoughts from a designated group even before we know what carrot we'll offer.
>
> If any requests are a non-starter then it may not matter if we can offer resources or not.
>
> I think investigating networks more receptive both to our bot needs and accepting our partner wikis.
>

Also, I think there's some larger implications to such a decision
and wikitech-l isn't really the forum for that. Perhaps meta or
foundation-l would be more appropriate.

wikitech-l only would need to be involved once a decisions's been
made and there's technical details to work out.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Gregory Varnum-2
Good point. There's a page on meta already / might be helpful for folks to post there.


-Greg

____________
Sent from my iPhone. Apologies for any typos. A more detailed response may be sent later.

On Jun 21, 2012, at 3:12 PM, Chad <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Mr. Gregory Varnum
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Is anyone from Freenode on this list or able to respond? I feel like they'd be open to the conversation and hearing general thoughts from a designated group even before we know what carrot we'll offer.
>>
>> If any requests are a non-starter then it may not matter if we can offer resources or not.
>>
>> I think investigating networks more receptive both to our bot needs and accepting our partner wikis.
>
> Also, I think there's some larger implications to such a decision
> and wikitech-l isn't really the forum for that. Perhaps meta or
> foundation-l would be more appropriate.
>
> wikitech-l only would need to be involved once a decisions's been
> made and there's technical details to work out.
>
> -Chad
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Sébastien Santoro
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:47 PM, Mr. Gregory Varnum
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Is anyone from Freenode on this list or able to respond? I feel like they'd be open to the conversation and hearing general thoughts from a designated group even before we know what carrot we'll offer.
>>>
>>> If any requests are a non-starter then it may not matter if we can offer resources or not.
>>>
>>> I think investigating networks more receptive both to our bot needs and accepting our partner wikis.

I don't understand why the wikiqueer community couldn't have its
channel while there are already communities channels like #gaygeeks
and #gaygeeks-fr.

Were it a channel problem (ie you can't have your channel on our
network) or a group registration issue (ie you can't have a group,
with cloaks)?

--
Sébastien Santoro aka Dereckson
http://www.dereckson.be/

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Gregory Varnum-2
Okay - just had a long chat with some staffers in #Freenode.  Here's what I've come away with..

Essentially folks are right that this policy is very much in flux.  Which leads me to believe that some nudging from Wikimedia would be well timed.

They have agreed to reconsider WikiQueer's app - but that whole process has been shut down while they review this policy - so that could be a few months.  Personally I take that as a good sign.

I think they're just not really clear how wiki communities work - so are not sure which are within their scope and which are not.  There is also a lot of internal debate over what their founding documents mean.  Some say they include open-content projects and other say that was meant to mean open-source software only.

They were generally uninformed and unaware of how wikis operate - and were surprised that there were "Wikipedia like" wikis beyond the Wikimedia umbrella.  Which implies to me a basic "cultural" misunderstanding that could be addressed.

I'd suggest we pursue the initial idea from Petr as a good first step.  We should be good stewards and outreach to their staff about our bot and tech related concerns - offer some thoughts on if or how wikis fit into Freenode's mission - and find out what resources they're in need of.  I'm not sure if that should come from a WMF staffer, one of the existing FN contacts for WM, a coalition of the willing, an owl with a note, or..

-greg


On 21 Jun, 2012, at 5:04 PM, Sébastien Santoro <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:47 PM, Mr. Gregory Varnum
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Is anyone from Freenode on this list or able to respond? I feel like they'd be open to the conversation and hearing general thoughts from a designated group even before we know what carrot we'll offer.
>>>>
>>>> If any requests are a non-starter then it may not matter if we can offer resources or not.
>>>>
>>>> I think investigating networks more receptive both to our bot needs and accepting our partner wikis.
>
> I don't understand why the wikiqueer community couldn't have its
> channel while there are already communities channels like #gaygeeks
> and #gaygeeks-fr.
>
> Were it a channel problem (ie you can't have your channel on our
> network) or a group registration issue (ie you can't have a group,
> with cloaks)?
>
> --
> Sébastien Santoro aka Dereckson
> http://www.dereckson.be/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Platonides
In reply to this post by K. Peachey-2
Faidon wrote:
> Setting up and properly maintaining an IRC network is extremely
> complicated.  We really *really* shouldn't do that, esp. since there is
> no reason for us to do so, when there are other open networks around.

freenode servers are hosted, not maintained. Which means, they want the
server (and its bandwidth), not that the hoster maintains the irc network.


On 21/06/12 14:24, K. Peachey wrote:
> (Last I saw) Freenode wants full root access on the boxes, Something
> that ops more than likely won't want to do if its sitting on our
> networks.

Not exactly, they would like it, but it's not a requirement.
"Where possible we look for dedicated machines with root access,
however, we will consider different set-ups too."
http://freenode.net/hosting_ircd.shtml

The requisites are pretty basic, and seem easy to fulfill. The only
complexity would come because ops would probably want to isolate that
server from the rest of the network.

The rest is just "donating" hardware and bandwidth. Which given by the
service provided by freenode to the wikimedia community, seems justified.


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Relations with freenode and wikimedia

Petr Bena
Actually when I talked to freenode staff, there were quite interested
in this. They don't have so many servers and wikimedia is well known
project with established technical infrastructure. Even if they needed
root, they could use puppet to set up the system to their needs and
there are many folks around, who would be happy to help them do that.

If there were some technical resources we could offer them, it's
definitely worth of asking. Being a donor of servers means, wikimedia
project would be listed together with our logo on their donor page as
a top donor and that would improve the overall look of our project
which is heavily using their network.

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 1:15 AM, Platonides <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Faidon wrote:
>> Setting up and properly maintaining an IRC network is extremely
>> complicated.  We really *really* shouldn't do that, esp. since there is
>> no reason for us to do so, when there are other open networks around.
>
> freenode servers are hosted, not maintained. Which means, they want the
> server (and its bandwidth), not that the hoster maintains the irc network.
>
>
> On 21/06/12 14:24, K. Peachey wrote:
>> (Last I saw) Freenode wants full root access on the boxes, Something
>> that ops more than likely won't want to do if its sitting on our
>> networks.
>
> Not exactly, they would like it, but it's not a requirement.
> "Where possible we look for dedicated machines with root access,
> however, we will consider different set-ups too."
> http://freenode.net/hosting_ircd.shtml
>
> The requisites are pretty basic, and seem easy to fulfill. The only
> complexity would come because ops would probably want to isolate that
> server from the rest of the network.
>
> The rest is just "donating" hardware and bandwidth. Which given by the
> service provided by freenode to the wikimedia community, seems justified.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
12