>Sure ;o) But running tool as CGI:IRC on a Wikimedia server may
>be nice for
>those you want to use discussion under a firewall. Not necessary during
>working time ;o)
>
>Aoineko
>
I could set it, if nobody is against. CGI:IRC is a perl script which dont take many bandwith. It's only text :)
Shaihulud
LS,
When a backup/restore process is running, usually there is some indication as to progress. Is there any information that can be shared about the problem, causes and what the likely scenario is.
* causes of the database corruption
* estimated time for completion
* estimated time to check the database after the restore
* estimated time of general availability
As to a drive to get more money, one of the critisisms on /. was that a figure had been given but that it was not clear how we came on that figure. The result was that people on /. came with all kinds of "well intended" advice.
Now a figure of 100k $ is mentioned; this is 5 times larger that the previous 20k. We are in the process of implementing the new hardware; what was wrong in the previous figures.
Possibly wikipedia-l is not the right forum, if so what is?
Thanks,
GerardM
t
>
>
>Shaihulud can set IRC up on a Wikimedia server when nobody is
>against it.
>
>Well, actually I am dead against it.
>
>The rationale against is overwhelming; it increases the
>complexity of the Wikimedia serverpark. The timing is bad; in
>the middle of a big outage requiring restore..
>
>Brion Vibber is against it; it puts too many eggs in the same
>basket. When the servers are down, the IRC goes with it.
>
>So, reading the message threat _please_ do not set it up even
>when you can.
>
I dont want to set up an IRC server, I want to install a gateway from http->irc.
IRC server will be freenode.net. It's only for people who cant get an IRC service through their firewall.
Shaihulud
Shaihulud can set IRC up on a Wikimedia server when nobody is against it.
Well, actually I am dead against it.
The rationale against is overwhelming; it increases the complexity of the Wikimedia serverpark. The timing is bad; in the middle of a big outage requiring restore..
Brion Vibber is against it; it puts too many eggs in the same basket. When the servers are down, the IRC goes with it.
So, reading the message threat _please_ do not set it up even when you can.
Thanks,
Gerard
Since this message was cross-posted to Wikipedia-l, I'm forwarding my
reply here as well.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] IRC question
Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2004 00:43:34 -0700
From: Brion Vibber <brion(a)pobox.com>
Reply-To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
References: <004d01c44c5e$ac5dc600$d100a8c0(a)arcsy.co.jp>
Guillaume Blanchard wrote:
> Hi,
> Why don't host IRC chanels on wikimedia servers ? (ie. irc.wikimedia.org)
"Don't put all your eggs in one basket."
If our servers are cut off, we could lose that communications channel as
well. (This is already a risk with the mailing lists. We have an offsite
backup MX but it doesn't always go smoothly.)
Also, IRC would be yet another service susceptible to load problems,
denial of service attacks, and various abuses. I feel much more
comfortable with the dedicated effort that the Freenode folks put into
running an IRC network well.
> Freenode may vanish day, we have better to get ready for that.
> It may be also nice to offer people under firewall a Web interface to be
> able to acces IRC even at office (as Shaihulud do for some of us with
> CGI:IRC).
We'll cross that bridge when we come to it; Freenode is a great
resource, and serves a lot of free software projects and users. I don't
understand why any planning is necessary when it's a simple matter of
setting up a channel somewhere else.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFAxByrwRnhpk1wk44RAuwWAKCU+P55sNn++59ZYxvzd2d9+ztkSgCcDV0c
Ixo+TT8DHleWe2EUu0ivnhU=
=vRfD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Hi,
Why don't host IRC chanels on wikimedia servers ? (ie. irc.wikimedia.org)
Freenode may vanish day, we have better to get ready for that.
It may be also nice to offer people under firewall a Web interface to be
able to acces IRC even at office (as Shaihulud do for some of us with
CGI:IRC).
Aoineko
It is suggested to host IRC on wikimedia servers. The argument being that Freenode may vanish.
There are several good reasons against it.
*It does cost extra bandwith.
*It means that the Mediawiki server park becomes even more complicated.
*This means that there are more eggs in the mediawiki basket.
*All this work is done to a large extend by volunteers. The current infrastructure needs all the attention it can get. IRC on wikimedia servers will devide the attention and that is not a good idea at this moment in time.
*There is no reason to believe that Freenode will be gone in the near future.
It is more important to stabilize the current servers and make them more reliable.
I have been banned from the wikipedia. I have not been provided with a forum for discussing the issue, nor have I been given a reason why my ban is justified. My posts are being rejected from the english mailing list, the arbitration committee has neither ruled on this -- nor communicated with me. Why have I been banned, and how can I appeal?
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger
--- "Thomas R. Koll" <tomk32(a)gmx.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 08:01:48PM +0200, Anthere
> wrote:
> > Neat ! I like the idea of double language.
> >
> > Who is reviewing the contents of the articles just
> before you generate
> > the pdf ?
>
> I gonna do as much as I can, but I need help in this
> review process.
> There are already a few like CatherineMunro helping
> and those will
> get their name in the impress (there's also a
> *complete* list of
> registered authors).
>
> ciao, tom
Hi Tom.
Yes, you need help. You already did something great in
organising the first publication of our content, which
was a serious step in the good direction :-) Thanks a
lot for doing this.
But you can't do it all alone. Publication should be a
team process and article validation is part of a
several step process.
Imho, no article should be printed with Wikimedia
approval/support, with no specific review beforehand.
Just because if the article contains a mistake (which
may or may not be obvious to you), the mistake can't
be
fixed on a pdf (...) and that could tarnish Wikimedia
image.
There have been several times discussions about
article validation (or certification ?). But afaik, it
was never done till any conclusion and decision of
action.
I think that it is high time that this is discussed
anew. I have a couple of ideas about this, and I think
some could reduce a bit tensions which exist on
en:wiki right now (and on de: as well, as I recently
heard), and at the same time increase cooperation and
people recognition. But I would be happy to hear about
other people opinion on that matter. I also know that
several people have good ideas on this as well. So...
I set a page on meta to host this discussion, or to be
the recipiendary of mailing list discussions.
Please help here :
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_validation
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/
I have been banned unfairly three times. I was first banned because I allegedly violated a "3 revert rule" of which I was never warned about; regardless of whether I did break it, I was banned by a sysop (Guarnaco) involved in an edit war on the page -- this is a gross violation of sysop rules!
I then went to the IRC channel to appeal my case, where I was harrassed by users such as Snowspinner and Fennec -- whose sole intent was to "rub salt in my wounds" if you will. I started telling them, "Please do not talk to me. You are rude and inconsiderate" each time did so. Then I was banned, solely for asking them not to talk to me! If anyone should have been banned, it should be them for being so rude to another contributor!
After I was unbanned by a more reasonably sysop, I was then immediately re-banned by RickK -- even though I had not edited any articles!!!!!!!! This second ban appears to be permanent, YET I HAVE NOT VIOLATED ANY RULES!
It is completely fallacious, RickKs claim that I am another user -- that I am a "sockpuppet". And even if I were, is it a crime? Am I double-voting? Am I agreeing with my other accounts, and creating false consensus? The answer to those questions are NO, this is NOT A SOCKPUPPET ACCOUNT.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger