Reducing the load on Sysadmin

[Luigi Toscano]

KDE ha scritto:
> Hi,
> 
> It seems there is always seem to be someone within KDE that wants something
> new and shiny, I name gitlab, Discourse, a new identity system, etc.
> 
> On the flip side, there is always someone that does not want to part with the
> old stuff. 
> 
> Hence there is always more stuff to do, while we must also maintain all the
> old stuff.
> 
> Sometime you need a step back to create room to go two forward. We are just
> asking to think with us if some services are really needed.

This way of representing the reality is a bit of a stretch, to say the least.

Most of the proposals haven't raised any concerns.
No one is going to shed a tear on the demise of cgit.
Moving to static-generator all the websites which does not need to be dynamic
has been on the work for a lot of time, and it will continue.
And so on.

What's left? Some services which you may think have no users, but they really
solve problems.
API and EBN are probably not working in their current form, but something that
covers they use case is needed anyway. There is some discussion, it's likely

Of course, when you propose many changes it is expected to see that not all of
them may work as planned. That's why the discussion here is needed.

About dealing with old services: it does not automatically mean "let's cancel
them" but more "let's see if this is useful, and if it but we have workload
issues, let's find a way to make it work".

Talking about websvn, I'm pretty sure that there are various solutions and
some of them have been proposed. To summarize the need: we do reference websvn
from pointing out specific changes in emails or other channels. It can be done
for git changes, it should still be possible for other changes.

I has been said many times that recruiting new people for sysadmins is
difficult for trust reasons, but I'm pretty sure that there are some people in
the community who can be trusted by sysadmin right now. In fact there are
already people managing some of the services, not all of them, so I don't see
why it can't be done for other services.
Or is the set of people who are potentially trusted by sysadmins really empty?


To be honest, the replies I've seen so far (which I'm nevertheless grateful
for) looks more like point to point replies dismissing the proposals. What I'd
like to see are more "yes, this can't be done this way BUT we may consider
this.". Please try to help each other to find the solutions, keeping in mind
that may not always fit your original plan.

-- 
Luigi