LoCo team website hosting

Matthew East matthew.east.ubuntu at breathe.com
Sun Aug 28 04:24:19 CDT 2005

On Sun, 2005-08-28 at 09:49 +0100, Henrik Nilsen Omma wrote:
> Jerome Gotangco wrote:
> >It would be much easier in a housekeeping/auditing sense to have all
> >loco team web resources in one point of contact instead of having 2.
> >So in my opinion, it would make more sense if we move all LoCos as
> >well as host future LoCos in linode. After all, these teams have
> >different needs (eq. PHP/Mediawiki), hence the linode proposal during
> >UDU.
> >  
> >
> Linode was just a first suggestion. We need to learn and adjust our 
> plans as we go along :)
> We tried Linode for two server, the docteam and the ubuntu-pt team 
> volunteered as the first LoCo team. We've realised though that the 
> Linode solution is quite poor value since you in reality have to share 
> the machine with many other (unknown) users. As a result, the power, 
> memory and disk capacity you get is quite small for what you pay and for 
> teams with high capacity needs it would simply be too weak, so it's not 
> very flexible  either. I think the reason Linode was suggested 
> originally was that it was (and is) one of the few providers to provide 
> Ubuntu servers.
> Rodrigo of the Brazilian team suggested we try 
> http://www.serverpronto.com/ which seems good value in comparison. They 
> have now set up several servers with Hoary for us which I'll be helping 
> to allocate. I'd also like to thank João Cruz from the Portuguese team 
> who will be helping me with setting up some of these servers for 
> multiple teams.
> That beings me to another point: collaboration between teams on servers. 
> Because we have a few dedicated servers now and several teams with 
> fairly modest needs we will need to share some of the servers between 
> multiple teams. This means those teams have to actively collaborate! 
> Fortunately collaboration is what the Ubuntu community is all about :)  
> It seems sensible that one person from each team acts as server contact 
> person and then gets full admin rights on the server. If new software 
> needs to be installed or whatever, other team members would have to ask 
> one of those admins (from any team).
> If misunderstandings or conflicts should occur between teams sharing a 
> server (is this likely?), then please ask me to help sort it out, and if 
> I can't then we'll ask the Community Council.
> What do you all think?

Sounds fine, however I think that having a number of people with root
access on a server is asking for trouble to some extent, not because
people will be malicious (I'm sure they won't be), but because admins
will not know what others admins are doing, installing, configuring etc.
This might lead to confusion. I think a single admin is the way forward,
as Matthias currently does on his server. Locoteams with even quite
ambitious requirements (wiki, web, forum etc) don't actually need root
access to a server IMHO. However if bigger teams need their own server
(although the only ones that would come into this category at the moment
currently have private hosting), in that case I think root access would
be sensible.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/loco-contacts/attachments/20050828/2b04a71d/attachment.pgp

More information about the loco-contacts mailing list