Re: maemo.org services go to read only mode for the migration

Just as a friendly reminder see attached mail from Andrew (Jaffa).
Just claiming there are "issues" is a tad thin.
Since you (board) are inheriting those new servers today or tomorrow anyway,
it is the absolutely most cost efficient place to host tmo right now (actual
cost: zero), given Nemein is willing to set up a plain VM for this purpose.
Running the VM will be basically for free. And setting it up should also be
free for board, unless Nemein for unclear reasons would decide they can't do
and charge this VM setup along with the other migration work they're just
about to do.
So I think it's not asking for too much, when we want to hear what exactly are
those issues and why they forbid moving tmo to the new maemo infra. So the
more tech savvy of us could think about ways to overcome those issues whatever
they are.
All of the above holds true even if board decides to move the complete *mo
infra to a different possibly more affordable place/hoster eventually.
Wouldn't matter to move one more VM during such migration.

Regards
jOERG (councilor)

On 12 December 2012 19:47, Iván Gálvez Junquera <ivgalvez@gmail.com> wrote:
>
[...]
>
> From the Hildon Foundation we want to thank Reggie for this contribution and
> for all the time and efforts he has shared with us.

Seconded!

> Now we have different constraints that affect the migration of the server:
[...]
> - Concerns about data privacy laws if we move the service from the U.S. to
> Europe.

Could the Board or Council share the appropriate laws? Presumably
under whatever jurisdiction TMO, Nokia and/or Nemein (who I believe
Reggie subcontracted through) are held?

Also, the link to TMO's privacy policy that we all accepted[1] which
said the data would be subject to that jurisdiction? And that we
weren't just submitting data which was, effectively, Reggie's to do
with as he pleases?

To cut a long story short, I'm not convinced there is any issue with
data privacy laws for moving where the database is hosted, given that
where it was hosted has not played any part in the TMO administration
or has been using facing in any way shape or form! :-)

Thanks in advance,

Andrew

[1] I don't believe there is one.

--
Andrew Flegg -- mailto:andrew@bleb.org | http://www.bleb.org/

On 2012.12.18 19:56 , Joerg Reisenweber wrote:
> Since you (board) are inheriting those new servers today or tomorrow anyway,
> it is the absolutely most cost efficient place to host tmo right now (actual
> cost: zero), given Nemein is willing to set up a plain VM for this purpose.
> Running the VM will be basically for free. And setting it up should also be
> free for board, unless Nemein for unclear reasons would decide they can't do
> and charge this VM setup along with the other migration work they're just
> about to do.
>

The physical build servers (those that will be transferred to foundation
ownership) will not be available before new year deadline (it takes time
to procure boxes anyway [and then they need to be base-installed and
physically moved to the datacenter etc] and the holidays will definitely
cause extra delays).

But that is not a major problem, Niels will transfer the build services
to VM(s) first and when the physical boxes are in place in the
datacenter, council can decide what they want to do with them.

Niels just said that he has no access to the TMO server, I don't have
access and I can't check with Ferenc right now but would be very
surprised if he has some access Niels doesn't.

So if someone tells me what TMO needs (nice-to-have and absolute minimum
separately) in terms of disk space, RAM and CPU cores I can see what can
be done about getting a VM up (we can discuss details of economics when
there is no immediate threat of downtime).

I can then give full access to designated person(s) to said VM who will
hopefully do the actual migration (since we have no access and our hands
are quite full enough already).

/Rambo

On 19/12/12 13:57, Eero af Heurlin wrote:
> On 2012.12.18 19:56 , Joerg Reisenweber wrote:
>> Since you (board) are inheriting those new servers today or tomorrow anyway,
>> it is the absolutely most cost efficient place to host tmo right now (actual
>> cost: zero), given Nemein is willing to set up a plain VM for this purpose.
>> Running the VM will be basically for free. And setting it up should also be
>> free for board, unless Nemein for unclear reasons would decide they can't do
>> and charge this VM setup along with the other migration work they're just
>> about to do.
>>
>
[..]
>
> Niels just said that he has no access to the TMO server, I don't have
> access and I can't check with Ferenc right now but would be very
> surprised if he has some access Niels doesn't.
>
I don't have access to TMO.

[..]
>
> /Rambo
>
Cheers,
ferenc

TMO hosting is about to be decided during today's Hildon Foundation
meeting. Also before moving the service we need to purchase a vBulletin
license.


2012/12/19 Eero af Heurlin <eero.afheurlin@nemein.com>

> On 2012.12.18 19:56 , Joerg Reisenweber wrote:
> > Since you (board) are inheriting those new servers today or tomorrow
> anyway,
> > it is the absolutely most cost efficient place to host tmo right now
> (actual
> > cost: zero), given Nemein is willing to set up a plain VM for this
> purpose.
> > Running the VM will be basically for free. And setting it up should also
> be
> > free for board, unless Nemein for unclear reasons would decide they
> can't do
> > and charge this VM setup along with the other migration work they're just
> > about to do.
> >
>
> The physical build servers (those that will be transferred to foundation
> ownership) will not be available before new year deadline (it takes time
> to procure boxes anyway [and then they need to be base-installed and
> physically moved to the datacenter etc] and the holidays will definitely
> cause extra delays).
>
> But that is not a major problem, Niels will transfer the build services
> to VM(s) first and when the physical boxes are in place in the
> datacenter, council can decide what they want to do with them.
>
> Niels just said that he has no access to the TMO server, I don't have
> access and I can't check with Ferenc right now but would be very
> surprised if he has some access Niels doesn't.
>
> So if someone tells me what TMO needs (nice-to-have and absolute minimum
> separately) in terms of disk space, RAM and CPU cores I can see what can
> be done about getting a VM up (we can discuss details of economics when
> there is no immediate threat of downtime).
>
> I can then give full access to designated person(s) to said VM who will
> hopefully do the actual migration (since we have no access and our hands
> are quite full enough already).
>
> /Rambo
>
>


--
Iván Gálvez Junquera

Timing will be important then. The server hosting (where TMO resides)
will end on January 20th and I'll let TMO run on it until that date,
so if a VM can be set up by then, then there is no need to get
temporary hosting.

Eero, here are the current specs of the TMO server:

- It is currently hosted on a dedicated 8GB 2GHz quad-core Xeon server
- Current Forum disk space size: ~12GB
- Monthly bandwidth: ~450GB
- Number of emails sent per week (mostly from forum reply notification): ~8000
- Separate server to FTP backup to might also be needed

If I can get FTP/SFTP rights to the web root of the VM and MySQL
access, once it is available, I can help migrate TMO to that server.



On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Iván Gálvez Junquera
<ivgalvez@gmail.com> wrote:
> TMO hosting is about to be decided during today's Hildon Foundation meeting.
> Also before moving the service we need to purchase a vBulletin license.
>
>
> 2012/12/19 Eero af Heurlin <eero.afheurlin@nemein.com>
>>
>> On 2012.12.18 19:56 , Joerg Reisenweber wrote:
>> > Since you (board) are inheriting those new servers today or tomorrow
>> > anyway,
>> > it is the absolutely most cost efficient place to host tmo right now
>> > (actual
>> > cost: zero), given Nemein is willing to set up a plain VM for this
>> > purpose.
>> > Running the VM will be basically for free. And setting it up should also
>> > be
>> > free for board, unless Nemein for unclear reasons would decide they
>> > can't do
>> > and charge this VM setup along with the other migration work they're
>> > just
>> > about to do.
>> >
>>
>> The physical build servers (those that will be transferred to foundation
>> ownership) will not be available before new year deadline (it takes time
>> to procure boxes anyway [and then they need to be base-installed and
>> physically moved to the datacenter etc] and the holidays will definitely
>> cause extra delays).
>>
>> But that is not a major problem, Niels will transfer the build services
>> to VM(s) first and when the physical boxes are in place in the
>> datacenter, council can decide what they want to do with them.
>>
>> Niels just said that he has no access to the TMO server, I don't have
>> access and I can't check with Ferenc right now but would be very
>> surprised if he has some access Niels doesn't.
>>
>> So if someone tells me what TMO needs (nice-to-have and absolute minimum
>> separately) in terms of disk space, RAM and CPU cores I can see what can
>> be done about getting a VM up (we can discuss details of economics when
>> there is no immediate threat of downtime).
>>
>> I can then give full access to designated person(s) to said VM who will
>> hopefully do the actual migration (since we have no access and our hands
>> are quite full enough already).
>>
>> /Rambo
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Iván Gálvez Junquera
>
>