Re: [Gforge-admins] PgFoundry Move

> > > My concerns with a plan like this are:
> > > A) I do not know linux as well as FreeBSD.
> >
> > 80% of the Gforge admins are Linux guys afaik, which is why we need
> > more FreeBSD help.
>
> Which is why at least 2 more FreeBSD guys (Stefan and myself)
> were brought into the fold a while back.  I can't speek for
> Stefan, but I have remained quite on this while I absorb the
> implementation specifics of the current setup.

Ok. That's good :-)


> > > B) Can infrastructure be provided to allow for timely disaster
> > > recovery in the event of JD's hosting falling off the face of the
> > > earth, (much the same way the pg servers in panama fell
> off a while
> > > ago).
> >
> > We don't have this *really* in the case of most of the
> infrastructure,
> > and this isn't in place for pgFoundry right now with Marc hosting,
> > afaik.  It is an issue we should be concerned with
> regardless of who's
> > hosting.  That and backup.  I've tried to address what's
> happening (or
> > not happening as I'm afraid) with backup before.
>
> Wether we have it today or not is one thing, but making it
> even harder to do in the future without having a solid plan
> is even more troublesome in my opinion.

Yeah. The question is more wether it's the right path to move down, if
it's been so hard to get there.


> > Unlike *BSD?  Generally there have been distros like Debian and
> > Slackware that have been server grade for over 10 years and
> are solid.
> > I think the distro of the month is a unwarranted slam from FreeBSD
> > people who don't see that others see BSD the same way (Free, Net,
> > Open, etc) just with less choice for their respective communities.
> > There are lots of Linux distros.  Some are better at the
> desktop, some
> > are better at the server.  Coming up with a consensus of
> what to use
> > would be pretty easy to do.  That being said, I don't foresee a day
> > that we'd use Linux just because everything else is running on
> > FreeBSD.  Being consistent is a good thing.
>
> For example we raninto an issue here were  we ended up with
> 100% distro lock-in because of a hardware vendor only
> providing binary kernel modules for one specific distro and
> kernel version.  Granted that is not a fault with "linux"  in
> general, but it did mean I had to support some one ofs where
> consistency would have been the preferred norm.

Yes, that's generally a big problem - only the commercial distros are
supported by the hw vendors. But AFAIK, few if any of these vendors put
out *ANY* drivers for FreeBSD at all.

But that's turning into a discussion Linux vs FreeBSD on technical
merits. Which is not the point I was making, and I doubt the one others
was. Technically, they're both good. They both have their good and their
bad sides, of course.
The point was one  of resources.

//Magnus