[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

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

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

MZMcBride-2
Hi.

OTRS (<https://ticket.wikimedia.org/>) is a critical piece of Wikimedia's
infrastructure. It currently handles nearly all customer service inquiries
directed at Wikimedia. Trusted volunteers triage and respond to this
e-mail.

Wikimedia is currently running OTRS version 2.4. The most recently
released OTRS version is 3.2. There's been an outstanding request to update
Wikimedia's OTRS installation for just shy of three years now:
<https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/22622>. OTRS' inventor kindly offered to
donate his time to help with an upgrade, but due to a number of factors,
this has become an untenable solution.

Given the bug's fast-approaching birthday, the security concerns of
running outdated software, the Wikimedia Foundation apparently being
overburdened and uninterested in maintaining this piece of software, and
mounting volunteer frustration, I'm wondering whether this is an area
where the Wikimedia chapters or some other group might be able to lend a
hand in supporting the maintenance of this piece of important
infrastructure. Broadly, the Wikimedia Foundation isn't acting on this
issue and it seems to have little interest in maintaining or supporting
this software any longer.

Given recent discussion about various Wikimedia movement roles, I'm
wondering whether a Wikimedia chapter or a grant or some other movement
player could either take on supporting the existing OTRS installation (by
hiring a contractor), evaluating and implementing better/different
response software, and/or moving the response system elsewhere.

MZMcBride



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Gregory Varnum-2
This could be a good project for one of the developing MediaWiki Groups.

MediaWiki Group San Francisco is already approved by AffCom and eligible for grants.

-greg aka varnent


On 20 Feb, 2013, at 11:25 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi.
>
> OTRS (<https://ticket.wikimedia.org/>) is a critical piece of Wikimedia's
> infrastructure. It currently handles nearly all customer service inquiries
> directed at Wikimedia. Trusted volunteers triage and respond to this
> e-mail.
>
> Wikimedia is currently running OTRS version 2.4. The most recently
> released OTRS version is 3.2. There's been an outstanding request to update
> Wikimedia's OTRS installation for just shy of three years now:
> <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/22622>. OTRS' inventor kindly offered to
> donate his time to help with an upgrade, but due to a number of factors,
> this has become an untenable solution.
>
> Given the bug's fast-approaching birthday, the security concerns of
> running outdated software, the Wikimedia Foundation apparently being
> overburdened and uninterested in maintaining this piece of software, and
> mounting volunteer frustration, I'm wondering whether this is an area
> where the Wikimedia chapters or some other group might be able to lend a
> hand in supporting the maintenance of this piece of important
> infrastructure. Broadly, the Wikimedia Foundation isn't acting on this
> issue and it seems to have little interest in maintaining or supporting
> this software any longer.
>
> Given recent discussion about various Wikimedia movement roles, I'm
> wondering whether a Wikimedia chapter or a grant or some other movement
> player could either take on supporting the existing OTRS installation (by
> hiring a contractor), evaluating and implementing better/different
> response software, and/or moving the response system elsewhere.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Rjd0060 -
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:25 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi.
>
> OTRS (<https://ticket.wikimedia.org/>) is a critical piece of Wikimedia's
> infrastructure. It currently handles nearly all customer service inquiries
> directed at Wikimedia. Trusted volunteers triage and respond to this
> e-mail.
>
> Wikimedia is currently running OTRS version 2.4. The most recently
> released OTRS version is 3.2. There's been an outstanding request to update
> Wikimedia's OTRS installation for just shy of three years now:
> <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/22622>. OTRS' inventor kindly offered to
> donate his time to help with an upgrade, but due to a number of factors,
> this has become an untenable solution.
>
> Given the bug's fast-approaching birthday, the security concerns of
> running outdated software, the Wikimedia Foundation apparently being
> overburdened and uninterested in maintaining this piece of software, and
> mounting volunteer frustration, I'm wondering whether this is an area
> where the Wikimedia chapters or some other group might be able to lend a
> hand in supporting the maintenance of this piece of important
> infrastructure. Broadly, the Wikimedia Foundation isn't acting on this
> issue and it seems to have little interest in maintaining or supporting
> this software any longer.
>
> Given recent discussion about various Wikimedia movement roles, I'm
> wondering whether a Wikimedia chapter or a grant or some other movement
> player could either take on supporting the existing OTRS installation (by
> hiring a contractor), evaluating and implementing better/different
> response software, and/or moving the response system elsewhere.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
>
>

I've been working on OTRS since 2008 and have been an OTRS administrator
for much of that time.  As somebody who devotes a lot of his time to
OTRS-related work, I'm extremely disappointed in the lack of support the
OTRS team has been dealing with.  As MZMcBride points out, there are a
number of reasons why the software needs to be updated.

Last year, we handled roughly 40,000 general inquiries in over 35
languages.[1]  This alone should be a convincing reason as to why we should
have at least somewhat up-to-date software, clean of security issues and
other problems.[2]

While I realize that there have been other priorities, I would have thought
that with 3 years of waiting, eventually OTRS would be important enough for
somebody to give some much needed attention to.

[1] -
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/01/24/the-incredible-work-of-the-wikimedia-volunteer-response-team/
[2] -
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=OTRS&product=Wikimedia

--

Ryan
User:Rjd0060
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

DeltaQuad Wikipedia
+1, the interface still confuses me at somepoints today.

But I have to ask, are we getting everything we need with an OTRS update to
the new version, or are we settling for a medioker (excuse my spelling, it
is late). Is it a better idea to have wikimedians (maybe through grants,
idk) build something open source and cc-whatever? That way fixes can be
made and we can get many devs (broad sense of the term) fixing bugs of a
new system.

DeltaQuad - Mobile phone
English Wikipedia Administrator and Checkuser
On Feb 20, 2013 11:35 PM, "Rjd0060" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:25 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > OTRS (<https://ticket.wikimedia.org/>) is a critical piece of
> Wikimedia's
> > infrastructure. It currently handles nearly all customer service
> inquiries
> > directed at Wikimedia. Trusted volunteers triage and respond to this
> > e-mail.
> >
> > Wikimedia is currently running OTRS version 2.4. The most recently
> > released OTRS version is 3.2. There's been an outstanding request to
> update
> > Wikimedia's OTRS installation for just shy of three years now:
> > <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/22622>. OTRS' inventor kindly offered to
> > donate his time to help with an upgrade, but due to a number of factors,
> > this has become an untenable solution.
> >
> > Given the bug's fast-approaching birthday, the security concerns of
> > running outdated software, the Wikimedia Foundation apparently being
> > overburdened and uninterested in maintaining this piece of software, and
> > mounting volunteer frustration, I'm wondering whether this is an area
> > where the Wikimedia chapters or some other group might be able to lend a
> > hand in supporting the maintenance of this piece of important
> > infrastructure. Broadly, the Wikimedia Foundation isn't acting on this
> > issue and it seems to have little interest in maintaining or supporting
> > this software any longer.
> >
> > Given recent discussion about various Wikimedia movement roles, I'm
> > wondering whether a Wikimedia chapter or a grant or some other movement
> > player could either take on supporting the existing OTRS installation (by
> > hiring a contractor), evaluating and implementing better/different
> > response software, and/or moving the response system elsewhere.
> >
> > MZMcBride
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> I've been working on OTRS since 2008 and have been an OTRS administrator
> for much of that time.  As somebody who devotes a lot of his time to
> OTRS-related work, I'm extremely disappointed in the lack of support the
> OTRS team has been dealing with.  As MZMcBride points out, there are a
> number of reasons why the software needs to be updated.
>
> Last year, we handled roughly 40,000 general inquiries in over 35
> languages.[1]  This alone should be a convincing reason as to why we should
> have at least somewhat up-to-date software, clean of security issues and
> other problems.[2]
>
> While I realize that there have been other priorities, I would have thought
> that with 3 years of waiting, eventually OTRS would be important enough for
> somebody to give some much needed attention to.
>
> [1] -
>
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/01/24/the-incredible-work-of-the-wikimedia-volunteer-response-team/
> [2] -
>
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=OTRS&product=Wikimedia
>
> --
>
> Ryan
> User:Rjd0060
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Rjd0060 -
In reply to this post by Rjd0060 -
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:34 PM, Rjd0060 <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:25 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hi.
>>
>> OTRS (<https://ticket.wikimedia.org/>) is a critical piece of Wikimedia's
>> infrastructure. It currently handles nearly all customer service inquiries
>> directed at Wikimedia. Trusted volunteers triage and respond to this
>> e-mail.
>>
>> Wikimedia is currently running OTRS version 2.4. The most recently
>> released OTRS version is 3.2. There's been an outstanding request to
>> update
>> Wikimedia's OTRS installation for just shy of three years now:
>> <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/22622>. OTRS' inventor kindly offered to
>> donate his time to help with an upgrade, but due to a number of factors,
>> this has become an untenable solution.
>>
>> Given the bug's fast-approaching birthday, the security concerns of
>> running outdated software, the Wikimedia Foundation apparently being
>> overburdened and uninterested in maintaining this piece of software, and
>> mounting volunteer frustration, I'm wondering whether this is an area
>> where the Wikimedia chapters or some other group might be able to lend a
>> hand in supporting the maintenance of this piece of important
>> infrastructure. Broadly, the Wikimedia Foundation isn't acting on this
>> issue and it seems to have little interest in maintaining or supporting
>> this software any longer.
>>
>> Given recent discussion about various Wikimedia movement roles, I'm
>> wondering whether a Wikimedia chapter or a grant or some other movement
>> player could either take on supporting the existing OTRS installation (by
>> hiring a contractor), evaluating and implementing better/different
>> response software, and/or moving the response system elsewhere.
>>
>> MZMcBride
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> I've been working on OTRS since 2008 and have been an OTRS administrator
> for much of that time.  As somebody who devotes a lot of his time to
> OTRS-related work, I'm extremely disappointed in the lack of support the
> OTRS team has been dealing with.  As MZMcBride points out, there are a
> number of reasons why the software needs to be updated.
>
>
>

To clarify, the Foundation support that would be appreciated here is from
the tech/ops group.  We've had good response from other staff on related
issues, and that is much appreciated.

--

Ryan
User:Rjd0060
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Keegan Peterzell
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Rjd0060 <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> To clarify, the Foundation support that would be appreciated here is from
> the tech/ops group.  We've had good response from other staff on related
> issues, and that is much appreciated.
>
> --
>
> Ryan
> User:Rjd0060
>

To clarify even further, from my perspective:

I've been an Volunteer Response Team agent since 2009, and a leader (OTRS
admin) since 2010.   In that time the control of OTRS moved from a function
that had a designated staff role of "control" to one of community
management.  In the past two and a half years Philippe has been our contact
for support from the Wikimedia Foundation, and he has done a fantastic job
supporting myself and the time with advice and Foundation resources as they
have been gathered.  Over the past year, Maggie Dennis has transitioned
into this role as the Foundation rep for OTRS.  She has done an equally
wonderful job in being proactive and helping us with our thoughts and needs.

I would in no way construe the support we've gotten from LCA than anything
less than they have to give as far as they have been able to get us.

Yes, that is a very long sentence.

--
~Keegan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Casey Brown-5
In reply to this post by DeltaQuad Wikipedia
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:18 AM, DeltaQuad Wikipedia
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Is it a better idea to have wikimedians (maybe through grants,
> idk) build something open source and cc-whatever? That way fixes can be
> made and we can get many devs (broad sense of the term) fixing bugs of a
> new system.

OTRS is open source. The letters "OTRS" themselves stand for
"Open-source ticket request system".

--
Casey Brown (Cbrown1023)
caseybrown.org

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Keegan Peterzell
Keegan Peterzell wrote:

>I've been an Volunteer Response Team agent since 2009, and a leader (OTRS
>admin) since 2010. In that time the control of OTRS moved from a
>function that had a designated staff role of "control" to one of community
>management. In the past two and a half years Philippe has been our
>contact for support from the Wikimedia Foundation, and he has done a
>fantastic job supporting myself and the time with advice and Foundation
>resources as they have been gathered.  Over the past year, Maggie Dennis
>has transitioned into this role as the Foundation rep for OTRS.  She has
>done an equally wonderful job in being proactive and helping us with our
>thoughts and needs.

I don't have much interaction with either on a daily basis, but I can
certainly say that it seems to be purely in terms of technical (software)
support where we're seeing an issue right now. The non-technical support
has been great, particularly since Maggie joined, from what I'm told.

But OTRS is ultimately a big piece of software. Maybe the Wikimedia
Foundation can buy a support contract for it if nobody is willing/able to
support/maintain it internally? Or maybe that's something a chapter or
grant could do? Dunno. I think any option is on the table right now.

This also isn't a criticism of the Wikimedia Foundation engineering folks.
They've got plenty on their plate as well, of course. But _somebody_ has
to be supporting the technical portion of OTRS. If the Wikimedia
Foundation can't/won't, someone else has to step in. That's where I
thought the chapters or another movement player might be an option.

Gregory Varnum wrote:
> This could be a good project for one of the developing MediaWiki Groups.
> MediaWiki Group San Francisco is already approved by AffCom and eligible
>for grants.

If they're willing to make a commitment to support it for at least a few
years (you don't really want to be moving infrastructure around all the
time, I don't think), I think this is workable. It's just a matter of
pointing where the e-mail is sent, as I understand it. And then
maintaining whatever solution you pick/build that manages the e-mail.

MZMcBride



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Keegan Peterzell
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:02 AM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> But OTRS is ultimately a big piece of software. Maybe the Wikimedia
> Foundation can buy a support contract for it if nobody is willing/able to
> support/maintain it internally? Or maybe that's something a chapter or
> grant could do? Dunno. I think any option is on the table right now.
>
> This also isn't a criticism of the Wikimedia Foundation engineering folks.
> They've got plenty on their plate as well, of course. But _somebody_ has
> to be supporting the technical portion of OTRS. If the Wikimedia
> Foundation can't/won't, someone else has to step in. That's where I
> thought the chapters or another movement player might be an option.


Absolutely agree with the sentiment.

--
~Keegan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

[[w:en:User:Madman]]
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 1:02 AM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
> This also isn't a criticism of the Wikimedia Foundation engineering folks.
> They've got plenty on their plate as well, of course. But _somebody_ has
> to be supporting the technical portion of OTRS. If the Wikimedia
> Foundation can't/won't, someone else has to step in. That's where I
> thought the chapters or another movement player might be an option.

Does anyone know what the status is of the OTRS project on Labs? Given
a contact, I'd be happy to do what I can to help; I have some limited
experience configuring/deploying OTRS (up until the end of the 3.0
branch last year, nothing with 3.1 or 3.2 unfortunately).

I think opportunities for *volunteer* help have to consciously be
maximized, especially for volunteers who are or are willing to be
agents and/or identified to the Foundation. It's not going to get done
otherwise.

-Madman/ea

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

James Alexander-3
In reply to this post by Keegan Peterzell
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 9:47 PM, Keegan Peterzell <[hidden email]>wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:36 PM, Rjd0060 <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > To clarify, the Foundation support that would be appreciated here is from
> > the tech/ops group.  We've had good response from other staff on related
> > issues, and that is much appreciated.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Ryan
> > User:Rjd0060
> >
>
> To clarify even further, from my perspective:
>
> I've been an Volunteer Response Team agent since 2009, and a leader (OTRS
> admin) since 2010.   In that time the control of OTRS moved from a function
> that had a designated staff role of "control" to one of community
> management.  In the past two and a half years Philippe has been our contact
> for support from the Wikimedia Foundation, and he has done a fantastic job
> supporting myself and the time with advice and Foundation resources as they
> have been gathered.  Over the past year, Maggie Dennis has transitioned
> into this role as the Foundation rep for OTRS.  She has done an equally
> wonderful job in being proactive and helping us with our thoughts and
> needs.
>
> I would in no way construe the support we've gotten from LCA than anything
> less than they have to give as far as they have been able to get us.
>
> Yes, that is a very long sentence.
>
> --
> ~Keegan
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
> _______________________________________________
>
>

Yeah, I have to agree sadly that we need more tech support and this has
been a thing that has been ongoing for a while. I personally think it
should remain in the foundation for many reasons (the least of which is
relatively large legal reasons) but we REALLY need to focus on it, or a
replacement, more.

OTRS is the public face of not only the projects but the foundation in
general and answers an absolutely insane amount of  email every year and
that has been the case for a while. When I first started applying to work
at the foundation my big interview ended up being about 8 hours (with a
liquor break in the middle) explaining to Philippe how I thought OTRS
needed to be replaced. I thought, and continue to think, that the system
underserves the job and we would be better served with something else that
could take much better advantage of modern advancements and clarity in
purpose.

Sadly at the time they didn't have the money for me to work on OTRS (and so
I came to do the fundraiser) and since then I have heard rumors of it's
upgrade or replacement every single year (multiple times) only to be told
later that the resources aren't available. I've seen us look at the upgrade
multiple times, I've heard it be called both new "ceiling wax and cake
frosting" but not necessarily called a good option. It may be, I don't know
and we (as usual with outside products) overwork it beyond measure. Even
the professional OTRS folks when we were talking to them about helping
upgrade basically said "errr, you have HOW much in the database?" and told
us to just abandon it and start fresh with their new version. That said
even their internal OTRS version wasn't upgraded yet last year ....

We need to do something though, it is disappointing to me that it hasn't
been a bigger priority because I think it should have been and I think it
should be now. I'm not sure if an OTRS upgrade is the best option... but it
is probably better then what we have. For a long while I thought we should
wait and not upgrade so that we can just replace it... but clearly it's
been too long for that now.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Keegan Peterzell
This conversation should shift to meta sooner rather than later.  I'm not
on my PC, but perhaps /Talk:OTRS/Software?

~ Keegan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

MZMcBride-2
Keegan Peterzell wrote:
>This conversation should shift to meta sooner rather than later.  I'm not
>on my PC, but perhaps /Talk:OTRS/Software?

I'm not sure moving to Meta-Wiki is a good idea. "OTRS" is the current
software. It's unclear what a "Software" talk subpage would be used for.

I'm inclined to say that whoever steps up and makes a commitment to
support a ticket response system can pick whether to stick with OTRS
or move to a different system, as long as it's comparable to (or better
than) OTRS.

James' post offered a lot of insight into why this has been so
slow-moving. (Thank you, James!) But at this point it seems fairly clear
that someone needs to become responsible for the technical support of OTRS
or its successor. I'm not sure Meta-Wiki can help with that. It seems more
like an organization issue.

James Alexander wrote:
>Yeah, I have to agree sadly that we need more tech support and this has
>been a thing that has been ongoing for a while. I personally think it
>should remain in the foundation for many reasons (the least of which is
>relatively large legal reasons) but we REALLY need to focus on it, or a
>replacement, more.

I would think the Wikimedia Foundation would want to remain pretty distant
from unfiltered volunteer replies to e-mails, from a legal standpoint, but
maybe someone from the Wikimedia Foundation legal team can chime in on
this point.

Thanks again for your post. Some of the background info in particular was
enlightening.

MZMcBride



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Liam Wyatt
On 21 February 2013 19:02, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm not sure moving to Meta-Wiki is a good idea. "OTRS" is the current
> software. It's unclear what a "Software" talk subpage would be used for.
>


I understood him to mean that we should move the *discussion* to meta - not
the handling of the emails themselves.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Keegan Peterzell
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Liam Wyatt <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 21 February 2013 19:02, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure moving to Meta-Wiki is a good idea. "OTRS" is the current
> > software. It's unclear what a "Software" talk subpage would be used for.
> >
>
>
> I understood him to mean that we should move the *discussion* to meta - not
> the handling of the emails themselves.


That.

--
~Keegan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

K. Peachey-2
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 6:02 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> James Alexander wrote:
>>Yeah, I have to agree sadly that we need more tech support and this has
>>been a thing that has been ongoing for a while. I personally think it
>>should remain in the foundation for many reasons (the least of which is
>>relatively large legal reasons) but we REALLY need to focus on it, or a
>>replacement, more.
>
> I would think the Wikimedia Foundation would want to remain pretty distant
> from unfiltered volunteer replies to e-mails, from a legal standpoint, but
> maybe someone from the Wikimedia Foundation legal team can chime in on
> this point.
>
> Thanks again for your post. Some of the background info in particular was
> enlightening.

As long as there is a NDA (or such) in place, It would be fine, No
different than having one of the OTRS devs work on it (see the bz
report about updates).

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Peter Gervai-5
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:25 AM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Wikimedia is currently running OTRS version 2.4. The most recently
> released OTRS version is 3.2. There's been an outstanding request to update
> Wikimedia's OTRS installation for just shy of three years now:

Yes. May have been me, or at least I hope I joined the chorus. ;)

> mounting volunteer frustration, I'm wondering whether this is an area
> where the Wikimedia chapters or some other group might be able to lend a
> hand in supporting the maintenance of this piece of important
> infrastructure. Broadly, the Wikimedia Foundation isn't acting on this
> issue and it seems to have little interest in maintaining or supporting
> this software any longer.

I have been administering a few medium sized installation of OTRS for
quite a long time, and happened to contribute to the code as well.
Several times I had the urge to offer a hand to upgrade it, and if
people are in need I do it now: I am  willing to upgrade it since the
current version is horribly old, and the upgrade process has proven to
work in the past for me between large version jumps as well.

(The required amount of project time is based on guesswork but if the
size permits it's even possible to create a new installation with a
copy of the old db and switch over, which is the safest way.)

My guess is that it's possible that the system needs serious review of
configuration since there has been plenty of big changes (speedups) in
the last years. It's doable.

However if anyone want to throw the work on me I most probably going
to look for at least  few people to watch over my typos. It can be
done alone, no problem, but safer if there's someone else's watching.
:-)

(For tech and administrative details feel free to contact me. I'm
userid 1 on huwp, and my identity is recorded plenty of times already,
as well as being an otrs member.)

> Given recent discussion about various Wikimedia movement roles, I'm
> wondering whether a Wikimedia chapter or a grant or some other movement
> player could either take on supporting the existing OTRS installation (by
> hiring a contractor), evaluating and implementing better/different
> response software, and/or moving the response system elsewhere.

I can help supporting OTRS, and Wikimedia Hungary can officially
support it as well. I do not intend to look for alternatives, partly
because I'm quite happy with OTRS, partly because I haven't met
anything better suiting this kind of job and partly because I'm not
interested suporting something I do not know.

(Judging by http://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/OTRS there's plenty of
possible improvement here, especially on the spamfiltering part...)

cya,
Peter
([[user:grin]] / [[:hu:user:grin]] / Peter Gervai)

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Thomas Morton
In reply to this post by DeltaQuad Wikipedia
I offered to look into this some time last year, and apply for a grant to
write an up to date piece of software. However it didn't get a good
response, with the foundation promising an OTRS update early this year...
apparent progress was made at that point, but it petered out very quickly.

Tom


On 21 February 2013 05:18, DeltaQuad Wikipedia <[hidden email]>wrote:

> +1, the interface still confuses me at somepoints today.
>
> But I have to ask, are we getting everything we need with an OTRS update to
> the new version, or are we settling for a medioker (excuse my spelling, it
> is late). Is it a better idea to have wikimedians (maybe through grants,
> idk) build something open source and cc-whatever? That way fixes can be
> made and we can get many devs (broad sense of the term) fixing bugs of a
> new system.
>
> DeltaQuad - Mobile phone
> English Wikipedia Administrator and Checkuser
> On Feb 20, 2013 11:35 PM, "Rjd0060" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:25 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > OTRS (<https://ticket.wikimedia.org/>) is a critical piece of
> > Wikimedia's
> > > infrastructure. It currently handles nearly all customer service
> > inquiries
> > > directed at Wikimedia. Trusted volunteers triage and respond to this
> > > e-mail.
> > >
> > > Wikimedia is currently running OTRS version 2.4. The most recently
> > > released OTRS version is 3.2. There's been an outstanding request to
> > update
> > > Wikimedia's OTRS installation for just shy of three years now:
> > > <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/22622>. OTRS' inventor kindly offered
> to
> > > donate his time to help with an upgrade, but due to a number of
> factors,
> > > this has become an untenable solution.
> > >
> > > Given the bug's fast-approaching birthday, the security concerns of
> > > running outdated software, the Wikimedia Foundation apparently being
> > > overburdened and uninterested in maintaining this piece of software,
> and
> > > mounting volunteer frustration, I'm wondering whether this is an area
> > > where the Wikimedia chapters or some other group might be able to lend
> a
> > > hand in supporting the maintenance of this piece of important
> > > infrastructure. Broadly, the Wikimedia Foundation isn't acting on this
> > > issue and it seems to have little interest in maintaining or supporting
> > > this software any longer.
> > >
> > > Given recent discussion about various Wikimedia movement roles, I'm
> > > wondering whether a Wikimedia chapter or a grant or some other movement
> > > player could either take on supporting the existing OTRS installation
> (by
> > > hiring a contractor), evaluating and implementing better/different
> > > response software, and/or moving the response system elsewhere.
> > >
> > > MZMcBride
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I've been working on OTRS since 2008 and have been an OTRS administrator
> > for much of that time.  As somebody who devotes a lot of his time to
> > OTRS-related work, I'm extremely disappointed in the lack of support the
> > OTRS team has been dealing with.  As MZMcBride points out, there are a
> > number of reasons why the software needs to be updated.
> >
> > Last year, we handled roughly 40,000 general inquiries in over 35
> > languages.[1]  This alone should be a convincing reason as to why we
> should
> > have at least somewhat up-to-date software, clean of security issues and
> > other problems.[2]
> >
> > While I realize that there have been other priorities, I would have
> thought
> > that with 3 years of waiting, eventually OTRS would be important enough
> for
> > somebody to give some much needed attention to.
> >
> > [1] -
> >
> >
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2013/01/24/the-incredible-work-of-the-wikimedia-volunteer-response-team/
> > [2] -
> >
> >
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=OTRS&product=Wikimedia
> >
> > --
> >
> > Ryan
> > User:Rjd0060
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Federico Leva (Nemo)
In reply to this post by Peter Gervai-5
Peter Gervai, 21/02/2013 11:04:
> I can help supporting OTRS, and Wikimedia Hungary can officially
> support it as well. I do not intend to look for alternatives, partly
> because I'm quite happy with OTRS, partly because I haven't met
> anything better suiting this kind of job and partly because I'm not
> interested suporting something I do not know.

Interesting. Has hu.wiki ever considered to use a WM-HU hosted instance
of OTRS instead of the WMF one? Given that this was among the suggested
solutions here, it would be useful to know about previous discussions on
the matter.
(The only thing I know is that WMIT considers WMF's OTRS so crappy that
even our own – rather bad – instance is preferred to using theirs.)

Nemo

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation's support of OTRS

Peter Gervai-5
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Peter Gervai, 21/02/2013 11:04:
>
>> I can help supporting OTRS, and Wikimedia Hungary can officially
>> support it as well. I do not intend to look for alternatives, partly
>> because I'm quite happy with OTRS, partly because I haven't met
>> anything better suiting this kind of job and partly because I'm not
>> interested suporting something I do not know.
>
>
> Interesting. Has hu.wiki ever considered to use a WM-HU hosted instance of
> OTRS instead of the WMF one?

Yes. It wasn't done because more often than not we got negative
feedback from the foundation when we wanted to host some of our own
services. Actually setting up a new one is quite simple, almost I'd
say a matter of minutes, plus maybe a few hours with all the
customisation (and thise we _severely_ miss by using the central
administered one).

> Given that this was among the suggested
> solutions here, it would be useful to know about previous discussions on the
> matter.

Indeed. I wasn't following the discussion since I supposed it's been handled.

> (The only thing I know is that WMIT considers WMF's OTRS so crappy that even
> our own – rather bad – instance is preferred to using theirs.)

It is not really maintained on the sysadmin level, to put it mildly.
I'm willing to change that if there's interest.

But your question may induce me to install one with the wikimedia
config just to see how it works with the new one. :-)

--
 byte-byte,
    grin

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