Re: [gentoo-project] Libera migration summary

[John Helmert III]

On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 06:20:40PM +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-05-22 18:37, Alec Warner wrote:
> > So my biggest problem is again governance; is there any transparency
> > on continuity of *Libera* or will someone just sell it again in 2
> > years?
>
> That's also my problem with Libera: I know they are new and ramping up a
> new service but at the moment all we have are promises.

I think it's obvious they're seasoned IRC network operators. Even if
there are hiccups at first they're surely experienced enough to keep
things going in the long term.

> It's good to read they plan to create a non-profit organization but we
> all know that this isn't easy. You have to do it first.
>
> And having a non-profit organization is one thing (I actually don't care
> about non-profit that much as long as I am not involved/contributing;
> I.e. even a Ferengi might provide a good IRC service). I am more
> interested in the organization itself. Who is owning the servers? Who is
> in control? Who has access?
>
>
> >> Reasons for migration to Libera: 1) Libera is the continuity
> >> choice. irc.freenode.net has no relationship with the previous
> >> freenode of the last 15 years other than the domain name and some
> >> sponsored servers. (Libera is already building up sponsorship and
> >> servers - it is not, as was alluded to on another thread, purely
> >> cloud/their own infrastructure.)
> >
> > I'm not sure what this means; how is Libera 'the continuity choice'?
> > Is it: Because the ex-freenode staff have asked us to move there?
> > Because we have a strong relationship with that staff? Because many
> > other projects are moving there? Some other reason?
>
> Same thoughts. The relation ship is nice but in the end it has no value:
> You can only look back at 15 years if things will change... not really
> an argument (see the distracted boyfriend meme). Also: I don't see any
> reason why we shouldn't be able to build up something similar with OFTC
> for example.
>
>
>  > Sam wrote:
> >> 2) We have a strong working relationship with the staff at Libera.
> >>
> >> For example, they immediately reserved our namespace (this means
> >> #gentoo-*) to prevent any hostile takeovers while we make
> >> decisions.
>
> All nice but not an argument either.
>
>
> >> 3) The vast majority of developers are not involved in IRC
> >> administration or indeed the migration efforts and may not be aware
> >> of the actual issues involved with coordinating with a new team. We
> >> are working with exactly the same people on Libera who understand
> >> what we require and have been working with us tirelessly to setup
> >> new cloaks, channels, and other special arrangements.
>
> Again, nice. But in case this should imply we can't have something
> similar with OFTC, this is wrong/disrespectful against other services
> (yes, you don't mean it that way, I just wanted to write it out).
>
>
> >> 4) Compare this with the current state of #gentoo-groupcontacts on
> >> Freenode which has 0 staff members. If we wanted to add/remove a
> >> new developer, or handle any other issues, there is simply nobody
> >> available to speak to.
>
> Sorry, right now this is an invalid argument: Freenode staff stepped
> down. We cannot blame them, that they don't have people at the moment.
> If you say that 15y relationship have some value, we should grant
> freenode some time to get the current situation sorted. Not?

Surely the "15y relationship" refers to the relationship with the people
(who are no longer at Freenode) rather than the abstract of "Freenode".

> But this is about freenode, I guess this train is moving so I can stop
> talking about freenode.
>
>
> >> 5) Freenode is currently experiencing high turnover of new IRC
> >> operators/administrators, some of which have dubious connections to
> >> Rizon and other controversial IRC networks. It’s clear that, even
> >> if they are skilled individuals, they haven’t been trained on the
> >> current way of working at Freenode given they’re not in any of the
> >> usual mediums we use to handle *projects*.
> >
> > Why is Rizon controversial? Note that freenode was attacked with
> > spambots repeatedly in the past (GNAA, other attacks) and freenode
> > admins struggled fighting the attacks for months. So why do we care
> > about spambot attacks now, as opposed to in the past? Or are the
> > attacks just a pretense we are using to move for other reasons?
>
> I second your questions. I think the controversial is based on
> https://twitter.com/ariadneconill/status/1395347865271246853
>
>
> My problem with Libera.chat is, that I feel instrumentalized and I don't
> want to get pulled into whatever is going on there. I think gyakovlev
> wrote, "This is not about who is right..." but it will become "who is
> right" if we follow former freenode staff. Is it a problem? I don't
> really now (how should anyone know that? All we have is hearsay/leaks we
> cannot verify). Many Gentoo people probably don't know what happened
> many years ago
> (https://twitter.com/flameeyes/status/1395042943392751621). Why did we
> let that happen and had no discussion about moving away from freenode
> when one of us got attacked? But today, when Gentoo is not directly
> affected, we are happy to move?
>
>
> >> 4) We’re not the only project to be moving. We’re far from being
> >> the first large FOSS project to move. This means that *if*, in the
> >> unlikely event this is the wrong decision, we’re in very good
> >> company. We’re joined by Ubuntu and CentOS for a start. 5) Large
> >> swathes of spambots continue to flood freenode given there's a
> >> vacuum left by the lack of administration.
>
> For me, this is the only but also strongest argument for Libera.Chat:
> IRC is only successful when our users are around. And users will be,
> where their projects are (nobody really wants to maintain multiple
> networks if not necessary, not?). So you will be in any Gentoo channel
> because you use Gentoo for example but when you have a problem with a
> KDE application, you just want to jump into KDE's support channel
> without switching network first...
>
>
> >> Reasons against OFTC *for now*: 1) Lack of developer/project cloaks
> >> (but dwfreed has indicated it’s _possible_ this can change in
> >> future)
> >>
> >> 2) Outdated/unconventional services and IRC daemon. This includes
> >> lack of SASL support and unusual/missing features in e.g.
> >> ChanServ. This is the general opinion in the “IRC community” too.
> >> Note that OFTC staff are trying to improve this but it will take
> >> time.
> >
> > What is the suboptimal outcome of this? I read this as "things are
> > different from freenode" which is not the same thing as "key
> > features of chanserv are missing." If they are missing, what are
> > they?
>
> OFTC will be different, yes. But they already have a stable foundation
> and aren't built on promises that they have yet to prove.

I am somewhat struggling to see a difference between the Freenode of
"yesterday" and the Libera of today. Organizations tend to be the sum of
their parts, in this case it's people. They've proven they're capable of
running Freenode for a long time, I see no reason they wouldn't be able
to do the same with a network of another name.

> --
> Regards,
> Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
> fpr: C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5
>