[OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] Test server for 2.1 (was: DIG Meeting Follow-up)

[Lori Bowen Ayre]

Hi Robert and Dan and DIG,

Just a point of clarification:  we are happy to provide a free test server
for the community and I know that Brian has had people use the test server
he's set up. Usually, people use it for awhile, break it, use it a bit more,
and then move on to another phase of their process.  So, our experience is
that there is a need for an easy to jump into demo server so we will
maintain that.  Also, there will be no charge for that (certainly as long as
we are functioning on IMLS grant funds - after that I'll have to check my
own Galecia accounts!)

There is also a need for a test server separate from that demo server which
tends to get screwy after so many people get on it.  I know Brian had been
in touch with Ben Webb so maybe it is time for them to reconvene.  We had
some data in the demo system but as I recall it wasn't the most useful data
(all e-content at one point).  At any rate, my point is, we are happy to set
up a designated test server separate from the demo server(s) that people use
so that DIG and anyone else who is testing new releases as a place to do
their work.

And finally, as to the other demo servers (fee-based), my concept there is
to offer that as a service for people who need easy access to their own
instance of Evergreen, want their own data loaded, may need it reset and/or
reloaded over the course of their testing, and require some assistance to
any number of things along the way.  I'm not sure what to expect in terms of
Brian's time commitment for such a service but I suspect it could easily be
3-4 hours of support per month per "client"  since the people choosing this
route are doing so because they aren't ready/able to set up their own
server. I'll move that discussion over to the General List since it is a
separate issue from the "test" and "community demo" servers, both of which
we are happy to provide gratis.

Let us (Brian and me) know how we can move the test server idea forward.  We
can wait for the community meeting but I'm not sure that's necessary.

Lori



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lori Bowen Ayre //
Library Technology Consultant / The Galecia Group
Oversight Board & Communications Committee / Evergreen
(707) 763-6869 // Lori.Ayre at galecia.com

<Lori.Ayre at galecia.com>Specializing in open source ILS solutions, RFID,
filtering,
workflow optimization, and materials handling
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=



On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Soulliere, Robert <
robert.soulliere at mohawkcollege.ca> wrote:

> Hi Dan,
>
> You summarized the intended purpose quite well. The main idea is to have a
> test server of the upcoming release so documentation authors could begin
> testing new features in practice before the official release of the version,
> thus reducing the time gap between release of the code and release of the
> official documentation. Hopefully, at some point we can release a good
> portion of the documentation at the same time as the code.
>
> The parts of the documentation to most benefit from this test server would
> be some of the staff client tasks and especially in regards to new features
> and work flows around those features.
>
> That being said, I guess the question should be brought up about whether
> this test server is a need in reality or only theory. In other words, if
> their is a test server for upcoming releases, will folks actually use it.
> Many of us have our own test environments and can set up test servers with
> future releases, but the hope was that this gives a greater number of folks
> access to a test environment for the future releases to help improve the
> documentation and get new documentation more quickly to the community.
>
> We might have a way to gauge usage of a community Evergreen  test server
> since Brian Feifarek generously to set up a test server for 2.0 months ago.
>
> It is publicized ion the DIG page (and other places):
> http://open-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=evergreen-docs:dig
>
> and it has been brought up at a past DIG and community meetings in the
> past.
>
> This was set up at the release candidate stage of 2.0 development. I wonder
> if we could get some statistics on usage or traffic for this server since it
> has been running for quite a while?
>
> Those number might give us an idea about whether this is a need at all at
> this time.
>
> Perhaps people could chime in as well to indicate if such a test server is
> useful or not -- we could extend that question to the general lists? Silence
> could tell us a lot.
>
> I don't think a route involving financial costs would be possible since DIG
> does not have a budget. Of course, a free server would be "free" as in
> kittens and not "free" as in beer since there are resource and time costs
> associated with a documentation test server which is why we need to verify
> if it is truly a need.
>
> In short, would demand justify the costs?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Robert
>
>
> Robert Soulliere, BA (Hons), MLIS
> Systems Librarian
> Mohawk College Library
> robert.soulliere at mohawkcollege.ca
> Telephone: 905 575 1212 x3936
> Fax: 905 575 2011
> ________________________________________
> From: open-ils-documentation-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org [
> open-ils-documentation-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Dan
> Scott [dan at coffeecode.net]
> Sent: September 2, 2011 12:55 AM
> To: Documentation discussion for Evergreen software
> Subject: [OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] Test server for 2.1 (was: DIG Meeting
> Follow-up)
>
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:15:47PM -0700, Lori Bowen Ayre wrote:
> > HI All,
> >
> > Regarding a test server.  We've been trying to provide a test server
> > environment with Brian's efforts.  Currently, I guess it is really more
> of a
> > demo server but without too much effort, we could probably set up 2.1
> > instances for libraries to use for their own testing.  Brian has the
> servers
> > on the Amazon cloud so we could build VM instances there.
> >
> > We'd probably have to charge a fee to set up a dedicated image of 2.1
> that a
> > library could use for a period of time.  Brian could be available to
> reset
> > it if someone wanted to start all over as part of their testing and he
> could
> > provide some limited tech support.  But the concept would be, your
> library
> > could have access to their own system so you could load data and test
> > settings without having to worry that another person would come in and
> undo
> > everything you set up.
> >
> > Is this of interest?  And if so, how do you see DIG being involved?  And
> > also, what could libraries pay (e.g. per month) for having us set this up
> > and maintain it for them....$500/month?
>
> A VPS at Linode and many other sites with 1.5 GB of RAM - enough to load
> a reasonable amount of data on for testing purposes - is about $60 /
> month. Before we even go that route, though, community members have been
> pretty generous in the past about making VMs available for various
> purposes (PINES with the Web server and various other machines, Mohawk
> with the doc server, Equinox with the testing and git servers, etc).
> Maybe step one would be to ask the broader community who (if anyone)
> would be willing to make a 2.1 server available.
>
> I believe the purpose of the system would be to test and document
> procedures to ensure that the documentation is sound - is that what you
> had in mind, Robert and Yamil? It sounds like what Lori has in mind
> would be something set up & reserved for specific libraries, which is a
> bit of a different beast.
>
> Ben Webb, as part of his Google Summer of Code project, had made
> significant progress on automating Evergreen installs. So we'd be
> looking at getting a 2.1 server set up, and running a single command to
> reload a clean set of data whenever needed (this, too, could be
> automated). It would be awesome to have a consistent set of data to
> support documented task flows so we could ensure that the outcomes are
> what we expect, but baby steps...
>
> Aside: this would be a good topic for our next community meeting, which
> we should probably try and schedule...
> _______________________________________________
> OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION mailing list
> OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION at list.georgialibraries.org
> http://list.georgialibraries.org/mailman/listinfo/open-ils-documentation
>
> This E-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended
> only for the individual or entity named in the message.  If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible
> to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication
> is prohibited.  If this communication was received in error, please
> notify the sender by reply E-mail immediately, and delete and destroy
> the original message.
> _______________________________________________
> OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION mailing list
> OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION at list.georgialibraries.org
> http://list.georgialibraries.org/mailman/listinfo/open-ils-documentation
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://list.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-documentation/attachments/20110902/5ab49445/attachment-0001.htm>