[gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Sergei Trofimovich]

I noticed that stable-bot stopped marking bugs as verified for stbilization.
Example:
    https://bugs.gentoo.org/695252

1. Is it gone forever and arch teams should stop relying on it's presence?
2. If not can the owner tweak it?
3. Can we have a wiki page that describes the setup and who to send reports to?
   Doc would be useful to run it locally, send bugs/enhancements, post current
   status if it's known to be broken.

Thanks!

-- 

  Sergei

Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Matt Turner]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:29 AM Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> I noticed that stable-bot stopped marking bugs as verified for stbilization.
> Example:
>     https://bugs.gentoo.org/695252
>
> 1. Is it gone forever and arch teams should stop relying on it's presence?
> 2. If not can the owner tweak it?
> 3. Can we have a wiki page that describes the setup and who to send reports to?
>    Doc would be useful to run it locally, send bugs/enhancements, post current
>    status if it's known to be broken.
>

It looks like it is working now, but I think we really should know a few things:

   (1) Who maintains it
   (2) Where the code is
   (3) and perhaps what happened to bring it down

It's a pretty important piece of infrastructure that we've come to
rely on, so it should be treated as such.

Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 941 bytes --]

On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:43:44AM -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:29 AM Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > I noticed that stable-bot stopped marking bugs as verified for stbilization.
> > Example:
...
> It looks like it is working now, but I think we really should know a few things:
> 
>    (1) Who maintains it
>    (2) Where the code is
>    (3) and perhaps what happened to bring it down
> 
> It's a pretty important piece of infrastructure that we've come to
> rely on, so it should be treated as such.
Can I take this opportunity to ask people to help populate the Service
Catalog?
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Infrastructure/Service_Catalog

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Treasurer
E-Mail   : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 1113 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[bman]

On October 3, 2019 3:32:28 PM EDT, "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@gentoo.org> wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:43:44AM -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:29 AM Sergei Trofimovich
><slyfox@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > I noticed that stable-bot stopped marking bugs as verified for
>stbilization.
>> > Example:
>...
>> It looks like it is working now, but I think we really should know a
>few things:
>> 
>>    (1) Who maintains it
>>    (2) Where the code is
>>    (3) and perhaps what happened to bring it down
>> 
>> It's a pretty important piece of infrastructure that we've come to
>> rely on, so it should be treated as such.
>Can I take this opportunity to ask people to help populate the Service
>Catalog?
>https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Infrastructure/Service_Catalog

Sad to see no one knows who maintains it. Kensington coded it and maintains it. Unless something changed. 

He fought very hard to have it accepted and there are still some folks who don't like it. 

Additionally, he runs it on his own infra IIRC.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Mike Gilbert]

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 11:09 PM <bman@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On October 3, 2019 3:32:28 PM EDT, "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:43:44AM -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:29 AM Sergei Trofimovich
> ><slyfox@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I noticed that stable-bot stopped marking bugs as verified for
> >stbilization.
> >> > Example:
> >...
> >> It looks like it is working now, but I think we really should know a
> >few things:
> >>
> >>    (1) Who maintains it
> >>    (2) Where the code is
> >>    (3) and perhaps what happened to bring it down
> >>
> >> It's a pretty important piece of infrastructure that we've come to
> >> rely on, so it should be treated as such.
> >Can I take this opportunity to ask people to help populate the Service
> >Catalog?
> >https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Infrastructure/Service_Catalog
>
> Sad to see no one knows who maintains it. Kensington coded it and maintains it. Unless something changed.

Many people are aware of this. However, he has not documented it, and
keeps the code to himself. This is not helpful when it stops working.

[gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Michael Palimaka]

Sorry for the late reply here.

On 10/3/19 1:43 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:29 AM Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>> I noticed that stable-bot stopped marking bugs as verified for stbilization.
>> Example:
>>      https://bugs.gentoo.org/695252
>>
>> 1. Is it gone forever and arch teams should stop relying on it's presence?

There was some temporary, unintentional breakage which regrettably I did 
not notice. Thanks to whissi for pinging me.

>> 2. If not can the owner tweak it?

stable-bot has since returned to normal service.

>> 3. Can we have a wiki page that describes the setup and who to send reports to?
>>     Doc would be useful to run it locally, send bugs/enhancements, post current
>>     status if it's known to be broken.

I agree, this is long overdue.

> It looks like it is working now, but I think we really should know a few things:
> 
>     (1) Who maintains it

That is me.

>     (2) Where the code is
Due to slacking on my part, the code currently just lives on my server. 
The intention has always been to clean it up and publish it with the 
client at https://github.com/kensington/bugbot.

>     (3) and perhaps what happened to bring it down
vixie-cron got last-rited and I neglected to configure its placement 
correctly.

[gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Michael Palimaka]

On 10/4/19 5:32 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:43:44AM -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:29 AM Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> I noticed that stable-bot stopped marking bugs as verified for stbilization.
>>> Example:
> ...
>> It looks like it is working now, but I think we really should know a few things:
>>
>>     (1) Who maintains it
>>     (2) Where the code is
>>     (3) and perhaps what happened to bring it down
>>
>> It's a pretty important piece of infrastructure that we've come to
>> rely on, so it should be treated as such.
> Can I take this opportunity to ask people to help populate the Service
> Catalog?
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Infrastructure/Service_Catalog
> 

Is it appropriate to list services that are not managed by infra on this 
page?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Robin H. Johnson]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 10:29:39PM +1100, Michael Palimaka wrote:
> On 10/4/19 5:32 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 08:43:44AM -0700, Matt Turner wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:29 AM Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I noticed that stable-bot stopped marking bugs as verified for stbilization.
> >>> Example:
> > ...
> >> It looks like it is working now, but I think we really should know a few things:
> >>
> >>     (1) Who maintains it
> >>     (2) Where the code is
> >>     (3) and perhaps what happened to bring it down
> >>
> >> It's a pretty important piece of infrastructure that we've come to
> >> rely on, so it should be treated as such.
> > Can I take this opportunity to ask people to help populate the Service
> > Catalog?
> > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Infrastructure/Service_Catalog
> Is it appropriate to list services that are not managed by infra on this 
> page?
Yes, in the 'External-run' section of the page. I'll add a stub for
stable-bot now that we have some more details.


-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Dev, Infra Lead, Foundation Treasurer
E-Mail   : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
GnuPG FP : 7D0B3CEB E9B85B1F 825BCECF EE05E6F6 A48F6136

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Andreas K. Huettel]

> > 
> > Is it appropriate to list services that are not managed by infra on this
> > page?
> 
> Yes, in the 'External-run' section of the page. I'll add a stub for
> stable-bot now that we have some more details.

In any case, since many people *do* rely on it, maybe we should declare it 
official? [+]

And, if that's OK with both of you, move it onto infra hardware?

Happy to sponsor both for the next council meeting agenda.


[+] At some point the one remaining whiner doesnt count anymore.

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer 
(council, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)

[gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Michael Palimaka]

On 10/8/19 7:21 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> In any case, since many people *do* rely on it, maybe we should declare it
> official? [+]
> 
> And, if that's OK with both of you, move it onto infra hardware?
> 
> Happy to sponsor both for the next council meeting agenda.
> 
> 
> [+] At some point the one remaining whiner doesnt count anymore.
> 

In the past, infra has been understandably hesitant to take on new 
services due to staffing issues.

Additionally, I understand that the current infra design does not easily 
allow granular access control, preventing non-infra members from easily 
performing maintenance on individual services.

Has this situation changed? I doubt infra want to take responsibility 
for the bot, and I don't fancy the hassle of trying to find people to 
poke things on my behalf.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 7:57 AM Michael Palimaka <kensington@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On 10/8/19 7:21 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > In any case, since many people *do* rely on it, maybe we should declare it
> > official? [+]
> >
> > And, if that's OK with both of you, move it onto infra hardware?
> >
> > Happy to sponsor both for the next council meeting agenda.
> >
> >
> > [+] At some point the one remaining whiner doesnt count anymore.
> >
>
> In the past, infra has been understandably hesitant to take on new
> services due to staffing issues.
>
> Additionally, I understand that the current infra design does not easily
> allow granular access control, preventing non-infra members from easily
> performing maintenance on individual services.
>
> Has this situation changed? I doubt infra want to take responsibility
> for the bot, and I don't fancy the hassle of trying to find people to
> poke things on my behalf.
>

IMO we should have a few tiers:

1.  Absolutely core stuff that infra has to run (authentication, LDAP,
maybe some services, etc).
2.  Community-run stuff that is FOSS, with public config tracking
(minus passwords/etc), and reasonably good docs.
3.  Community-run stuff that is the wild west.

IMO having a service catalog that includes all of this stuff is
beneficial, with clear indications as to which tier each thing is in
and who to contact with issues.

Depending on #1-2 shouldn't really be a problem.  #3 can be a
playground for experimentation but shouldn't be something we really
depend on for core workflow.  To mitigate the risk of #2 we could have
exercises to clone services following docs/etc.  If anything #2 has
the potential to be more reliable than #1 if it gets enough attention
(though there is no reason our internal services couldn't also be made
easy-to-replicate).

I think the issue here is that we don't really have any standards for
#2, but it is clear that this particular bot is intended to meet those
requirements but doesn't quite do so today.

I think this is a compromise that could help us focus our infra
resources where they're needed most, with some separation of concerns.
Ideally we should also make it possible via single-sign-on
technologies to leverage infra's authentication services for stuff in
tier 2, and maybe tier 3.  Biggest risk is phishing if somebody spoofs
a sign-on page.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Alec Warner]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1274 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 4:57 AM Michael Palimaka <kensington@gentoo.org>
wrote:

> On 10/8/19 7:21 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > In any case, since many people *do* rely on it, maybe we should declare
> it
> > official? [+]
> >
> > And, if that's OK with both of you, move it onto infra hardware?
> >
> > Happy to sponsor both for the next council meeting agenda.
> >
> >
> > [+] At some point the one remaining whiner doesnt count anymore.
> >
>
> In the past, infra has been understandably hesitant to take on new
> services due to staffing issues.
>
> Additionally, I understand that the current infra design does not easily
> allow granular access control, preventing non-infra members from easily
> performing maintenance on individual services.
>
> Has this situation changed? I doubt infra want to take responsibility
> for the bot, and I don't fancy the hassle of trying to find people to
> poke things on my behalf.
>

Things have not changed. We don't need to run the bot, we just need some
clearer contact info for it IMHO.

I don't think the reliability of the bot is really that different from
official infra services, but it was unclear who owned it and so there was
confusion; and I think the confusion is the key thing we are looking to
resolve here.

-A

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1738 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Matt Turner]

stable-bot appears to be down again. I've been unsuccessful in
reaching kensington on IRC.

I think stable-bot has become an integral part of the workflow and as
such (1) we should have the code available and (2) we should run it on
some hardware that others are able to administer.

Can we please?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it?

[Sergei Trofimovich]

On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 22:27:23 +1100
Michael Palimaka <kensington@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Sorry for the late reply here.
> 
> On 10/3/19 1:43 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 12:29 AM Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@gentoo.org> wrote:  
> >>
> >> I noticed that stable-bot stopped marking bugs as verified for stbilization.
> >> Example:
> >>      https://bugs.gentoo.org/695252
> >>
> >> 1. Is it gone forever and arch teams should stop relying on it's presence?  
> 
> There was some temporary, unintentional breakage which regrettably I did 
> not notice. Thanks to whissi for pinging me.
> 
> >> 2. If not can the owner tweak it?  
> 
> stable-bot has since returned to normal service.
> 
> >> 3. Can we have a wiki page that describes the setup and who to send reports to?
> >>     Doc would be useful to run it locally, send bugs/enhancements, post current
> >>     status if it's known to be broken.  
> 
> I agree, this is long overdue.
> 
> > It looks like it is working now, but I think we really should know a few things:
> > 
> >     (1) Who maintains it  
> 
> That is me.
> 
> >     (2) Where the code is  
> Due to slacking on my part, the code currently just lives on my server. 
> The intention has always been to clean it up and publish it with the 
> client at https://github.com/kensington/bugbot.
> 
> >     (3) and perhaps what happened to bring it down  
> vixie-cron got last-rited and I neglected to configure its placement 
> correctly.
> 

I've added a stub page for stable bot:
    https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Stable_bot

Eeveryone, feel free to dump more stuff there.

-- 

  Sergei