Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Libera migration summary
Date: Sun, 23 May 2021 16:20:51
Message-Id: 48f002db-4b25-3d91-393a-e751452ce6e4@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Libera migration summary by Alec Warner
1 Hi,
2
3 On 2021-05-22 18:37, Alec Warner wrote:
4 > So my biggest problem is again governance; is there any transparency
5 > on continuity of *Libera* or will someone just sell it again in 2
6 > years?
7
8 That's also my problem with Libera: I know they are new and ramping up a
9 new service but at the moment all we have are promises.
10
11 It's good to read they plan to create a non-profit organization but we
12 all know that this isn't easy. You have to do it first.
13
14 And having a non-profit organization is one thing (I actually don't care
15 about non-profit that much as long as I am not involved/contributing;
16 I.e. even a Ferengi might provide a good IRC service). I am more
17 interested in the organization itself. Who is owning the servers? Who is
18 in control? Who has access?
19
20
21 >> Reasons for migration to Libera: 1) Libera is the continuity
22 >> choice. irc.freenode.net has no relationship with the previous
23 >> freenode of the last 15 years other than the domain name and some
24 >> sponsored servers. (Libera is already building up sponsorship and
25 >> servers - it is not, as was alluded to on another thread, purely
26 >> cloud/their own infrastructure.)
27 >
28 > I'm not sure what this means; how is Libera 'the continuity choice'?
29 > Is it: Because the ex-freenode staff have asked us to move there?
30 > Because we have a strong relationship with that staff? Because many
31 > other projects are moving there? Some other reason?
32
33 Same thoughts. The relation ship is nice but in the end it has no value:
34 You can only look back at 15 years if things will change... not really
35 an argument (see the distracted boyfriend meme). Also: I don't see any
36 reason why we shouldn't be able to build up something similar with OFTC
37 for example.
38
39
40 > Sam wrote:
41 >> 2) We have a strong working relationship with the staff at Libera.
42 >>
43 >> For example, they immediately reserved our namespace (this means
44 >> #gentoo-*) to prevent any hostile takeovers while we make
45 >> decisions.
46
47 All nice but not an argument either.
48
49
50 >> 3) The vast majority of developers are not involved in IRC
51 >> administration or indeed the migration efforts and may not be aware
52 >> of the actual issues involved with coordinating with a new team. We
53 >> are working with exactly the same people on Libera who understand
54 >> what we require and have been working with us tirelessly to setup
55 >> new cloaks, channels, and other special arrangements.
56
57 Again, nice. But in case this should imply we can't have something
58 similar with OFTC, this is wrong/disrespectful against other services
59 (yes, you don't mean it that way, I just wanted to write it out).
60
61
62 >> 4) Compare this with the current state of #gentoo-groupcontacts on
63 >> Freenode which has 0 staff members. If we wanted to add/remove a
64 >> new developer, or handle any other issues, there is simply nobody
65 >> available to speak to.
66
67 Sorry, right now this is an invalid argument: Freenode staff stepped
68 down. We cannot blame them, that they don't have people at the moment.
69 If you say that 15y relationship have some value, we should grant
70 freenode some time to get the current situation sorted. Not?
71
72 But this is about freenode, I guess this train is moving so I can stop
73 talking about freenode.
74
75
76 >> 5) Freenode is currently experiencing high turnover of new IRC
77 >> operators/administrators, some of which have dubious connections to
78 >> Rizon and other controversial IRC networks. It’s clear that, even
79 >> if they are skilled individuals, they haven’t been trained on the
80 >> current way of working at Freenode given they’re not in any of the
81 >> usual mediums we use to handle *projects*.
82 >
83 > Why is Rizon controversial? Note that freenode was attacked with
84 > spambots repeatedly in the past (GNAA, other attacks) and freenode
85 > admins struggled fighting the attacks for months. So why do we care
86 > about spambot attacks now, as opposed to in the past? Or are the
87 > attacks just a pretense we are using to move for other reasons?
88
89 I second your questions. I think the controversial is based on
90 https://twitter.com/ariadneconill/status/1395347865271246853
91
92
93 My problem with Libera.chat is, that I feel instrumentalized and I don't
94 want to get pulled into whatever is going on there. I think gyakovlev
95 wrote, "This is not about who is right..." but it will become "who is
96 right" if we follow former freenode staff. Is it a problem? I don't
97 really now (how should anyone know that? All we have is hearsay/leaks we
98 cannot verify). Many Gentoo people probably don't know what happened
99 many years ago
100 (https://twitter.com/flameeyes/status/1395042943392751621). Why did we
101 let that happen and had no discussion about moving away from freenode
102 when one of us got attacked? But today, when Gentoo is not directly
103 affected, we are happy to move?
104
105
106 >> 4) We’re not the only project to be moving. We’re far from being
107 >> the first large FOSS project to move. This means that *if*, in the
108 >> unlikely event this is the wrong decision, we’re in very good
109 >> company. We’re joined by Ubuntu and CentOS for a start. 5) Large
110 >> swathes of spambots continue to flood freenode given there's a
111 >> vacuum left by the lack of administration.
112
113 For me, this is the only but also strongest argument for Libera.Chat:
114 IRC is only successful when our users are around. And users will be,
115 where their projects are (nobody really wants to maintain multiple
116 networks if not necessary, not?). So you will be in any Gentoo channel
117 because you use Gentoo for example but when you have a problem with a
118 KDE application, you just want to jump into KDE's support channel
119 without switching network first...
120
121
122 >> Reasons against OFTC *for now*: 1) Lack of developer/project cloaks
123 >> (but dwfreed has indicated it’s _possible_ this can change in
124 >> future)
125 >>
126 >> 2) Outdated/unconventional services and IRC daemon. This includes
127 >> lack of SASL support and unusual/missing features in e.g.
128 >> ChanServ. This is the general opinion in the “IRC community” too.
129 >> Note that OFTC staff are trying to improve this but it will take
130 >> time.
131 >
132 > What is the suboptimal outcome of this? I read this as "things are
133 > different from freenode" which is not the same thing as "key
134 > features of chanserv are missing." If they are missing, what are
135 > they?
136
137 OFTC will be different, yes. But they already have a stable foundation
138 and aren't built on promises that they have yet to prove.
139
140
141 --
142 Regards,
143 Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
144 fpr: C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5

Attachments

File name MIME type
OpenPGP_signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-project] Libera migration summary John Helmert III <ajak@g.o>