[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Should we have a systems administrators list?

[Yamil Suarez]

Hello everyone,


I just wanted to finally weigh in on this topic. For now I am  
partially siding with Ben Shum in that we do not create a new list  
because "silo'ing" concerns, but I always though that it was never  
clear if I should use the dev or the general lists for my sysadmin  
questions.

For example, see below for how the two lists are currently described  
on the site
	http://evergreen-ils.org/listserv.php



---------------
A)  Evergreen General Discussion List
This is the general-topic, (usually) non-technical list for the  
Evergreen community -- Evergreen users, librarians, library workers,  
library users, developers, fellow travelers, or people just plain  
curious about Evergreen. As of October, 2008, this list had over 500  
members. Its traffic is moderate.

General means general. Posts range from discussions about possible new  
features to quick questions about implementation. There is no such  
thing as a "dumb" question or comment for the Evergreen general list.  
If you're thinking the question, chances are, you're in good company.  
Ask, and you give other members of the Evergreen community an  
opportunity to share their growing knowledge.

B) Evergreen Technical Discussion List
This list is for patches and technical discussions about Evergreen and  
OpenSRF development. Messages and responses are often in the shorthand  
common to this culture.
----------------


So which ever way we go with this, I think we should make small  
updates to the description of which ever lists that we end up with to  
make it more clear where sysadmin questions should be send to.


Finally, thanks to Chris for setting up a meeting to talk about this.

Yamil






On May 1, 2012, at 12:14 PM, Ben Shum wrote:

> I'm -1 to this proposal.
>
> For many years, I've mused with other Evergreen system  
> administrators on the issues facing our particular role and areas  
> for discussion.  The idea of making our own mailing list seemed like  
> a good idea at many points in those discussions, and if you asked me  
> a few years ago, I would have said yes.
>
> But here are some potential concerns I have now:
>
> While our role within our organizations may be to find the best  
> practices for implementing/running an Evergreen system (and all the  
> related areas of interest noted), we can also have a key role to  
> play in Evergreen's overall development.  As system administrators,  
> we are often at the cutting edge of testing, bug reporting, and  
> troubleshooting how Evergreen performs in the field.  We can provide  
> invaluable feedback to the Evergreen developers when we discuss our  
> sys-admin issues in the existing lists / IRC.
>
> Creating a separate list introduces the possibility that more  
> information can become lost between groups if people do not  
> subscribe to every list.  While of course, many of us would likely  
> be signed up to these multiple lists and potentially act as  
> representatives between groups, I do not like to see the burden of  
> communication between various lists/groups to become a necessary  
> conscious act on behalf of those subscribed to several lists.
>
> Like say for example:
>
> John Smith has an installation problem and mentions it only on the  
> sys admin list.  But it turns out to be an actual issue with the  
> Evergreen code itself and we have to involve developers to get it  
> fixed for everyone in the community.  Do we then have to take the  
> originally reported issue from the sys admin list and forward it to  
> the dev list and discuss solutions?  The extra time and potential  
> for lost information/facts gives me concerns that having that extra  
> layer of communication may prove unwieldy.
>
> Alternatively, what if someone posted a question to both mailing  
> lists (sys admin and dev) and different people respond on each  
> thread (based on whichever list they were subscribed) and the  
> conversation becomes fractured between two lists?  How does  
> everything get put back together in a nice ordered way for the next  
> generation of users searching for information / learning.
>
> To summarize, in my opinion, the system administrators while  
> definitely having their own set of issues and topics of discussion  
> are still a core part of the overall Evergreen development community  
> and we should participate using the same areas for discussion such  
> as the dev mailing list and IRC so that we don't miss anything or  
> leave anything out of the mainstream Evergreen community.  The main  
> thing I would want to change at this point in time is perhaps the  
> wording used to describe the dev mailing list to expand beyond just  
> technical code/patches, but to be a broader description and  
> reinforce the "technical discussion list" title.  Unless of course,  
> the developers tell us that they'd prefer to keep that list to  
> talking only about real development only...  ;)
>
> -- Ben
>
> On 4/30/2012 8:11 PM, Justin Hopkins wrote:
>> We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator  
>> training,
>> which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of a
>> new discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration.
>>
>> I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this group
>> is any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systems
>> administration (troubleshooting server config issues,
>> installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning,
>> network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be an
>> area that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great help
>> on those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's  
>> face
>> it - IRC is and probably always will be the domain of developers.
>>
>> I'm hoping that if enough people on this list express an interest  
>> that
>> someone (Chris Sharp?) could create such a list. So let's hear it
>> sysads - should we create the "missing list"?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Justin Hopkins
>> Coordinator, IT&  Web Services
>> MOBIUS Consortium Office
>> c: 573-808-2309
>>
>> --sent from a mobile device--
>>
>
> -- 
> Benjamin Shum
> Open Source Software Coordinator
> Bibliomation, Inc.
> 32 Crest Road
> Middlebury, CT 06762
> 203-577-4070, ext. 113
>