* [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? @ 2019-09-26 7:28 Sergei Trofimovich 2019-10-02 15:43 ` Matt Turner 2019-12-06 16:15 ` [gentoo-dev] " Matt Turner 0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Sergei Trofimovich @ 2019-09-26 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-09-26 7:28 [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? Sergei Trofimovich @ 2019-10-02 15:43 ` Matt Turner 2019-10-03 19:32 ` Robin H. Johnson 2019-10-07 11:27 ` Michael Palimaka 2019-12-06 16:15 ` [gentoo-dev] " Matt Turner 1 sibling, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Matt Turner @ 2019-10-02 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo development, Michael Palimaka 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. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-02 15:43 ` Matt Turner @ 2019-10-03 19:32 ` Robin H. Johnson 2019-10-04 3:09 ` bman 2019-10-07 11:29 ` [gentoo-dev] " Michael Palimaka 2019-10-07 11:27 ` Michael Palimaka 1 sibling, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Robin H. Johnson @ 2019-10-03 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev [-- 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 --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-03 19:32 ` Robin H. Johnson @ 2019-10-04 3:09 ` bman 2019-10-04 11:30 ` Mike Gilbert 2019-10-07 11:29 ` [gentoo-dev] " Michael Palimaka 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: bman @ 2019-10-04 3:09 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev, Robin H. Johnson 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. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-04 3:09 ` bman @ 2019-10-04 11:30 ` Mike Gilbert 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Mike Gilbert @ 2019-10-04 11:30 UTC (permalink / raw To: Gentoo Dev 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. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-03 19:32 ` Robin H. Johnson 2019-10-04 3:09 ` bman @ 2019-10-07 11:29 ` Michael Palimaka 2019-10-07 19:11 ` Robin H. Johnson 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Palimaka @ 2019-10-07 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev 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? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-07 11:29 ` [gentoo-dev] " Michael Palimaka @ 2019-10-07 19:11 ` Robin H. Johnson 2019-10-07 20:21 ` Andreas K. Huettel 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Robin H. Johnson @ 2019-10-07 19:11 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-07 19:11 ` Robin H. Johnson @ 2019-10-07 20:21 ` Andreas K. Huettel 2019-10-08 11:57 ` Michael Palimaka 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Andreas K. Huettel @ 2019-10-07 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev; +Cc: Robin H. Johnson, kensington > > > > 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) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-07 20:21 ` Andreas K. Huettel @ 2019-10-08 11:57 ` Michael Palimaka 2019-10-08 12:22 ` Rich Freeman 2019-10-08 15:46 ` Alec Warner 0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Palimaka @ 2019-10-08 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev 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. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-08 11:57 ` Michael Palimaka @ 2019-10-08 12:22 ` Rich Freeman 2019-10-08 15:46 ` Alec Warner 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Rich Freeman @ 2019-10-08 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-08 11:57 ` Michael Palimaka 2019-10-08 12:22 ` Rich Freeman @ 2019-10-08 15:46 ` Alec Warner 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Alec Warner @ 2019-10-08 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw To: Gentoo Dev [-- 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 --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-02 15:43 ` Matt Turner 2019-10-03 19:32 ` Robin H. Johnson @ 2019-10-07 11:27 ` Michael Palimaka 2019-12-24 12:19 ` Sergei Trofimovich 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Palimaka @ 2019-10-07 11:27 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev 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. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-10-07 11:27 ` Michael Palimaka @ 2019-12-24 12:19 ` Sergei Trofimovich 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Sergei Trofimovich @ 2019-12-24 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw Cc: gentoo-dev 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 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? 2019-09-26 7:28 [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? Sergei Trofimovich 2019-10-02 15:43 ` Matt Turner @ 2019-12-06 16:15 ` Matt Turner 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Matt Turner @ 2019-12-06 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo development, Michael Palimaka 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? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-12-24 12:19 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-09-26 7:28 [gentoo-dev] stable-bot is down. Temporary? Forever? Can we have a contacts page for it? Sergei Trofimovich 2019-10-02 15:43 ` Matt Turner 2019-10-03 19:32 ` Robin H. Johnson 2019-10-04 3:09 ` bman 2019-10-04 11:30 ` Mike Gilbert 2019-10-07 11:29 ` [gentoo-dev] " Michael Palimaka 2019-10-07 19:11 ` Robin H. Johnson 2019-10-07 20:21 ` Andreas K. Huettel 2019-10-08 11:57 ` Michael Palimaka 2019-10-08 12:22 ` Rich Freeman 2019-10-08 15:46 ` Alec Warner 2019-10-07 11:27 ` Michael Palimaka 2019-12-24 12:19 ` Sergei Trofimovich 2019-12-06 16:15 ` [gentoo-dev] " Matt Turner
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox