[theforum] RFC: w.e.o and l.e.o Server Integration
William Anderson
neuro at well.com
Sun May 23 13:02:39 CDT 2004
Dean Mah wrote:
> Topic:
>
> It seems that no one has an argument against changing the server where
> l.e.o, d.e.o, and b.e.o are currently being hosted to ServerMatrix.
>
> The one area of concern is what the requirements for this machine
> should be since there has been talk about using a single server rather
> than the two we have now.
>
> Integrating the two servers into one will mean a bigger box and a
> change in platform.
>
>
> Options:
>
> 1) Move l.e.o, d.e.o, and b.e.o to a Windows platform to be place with
> w.e.o which is currently running on Windows with CF/IIS/SQL Server.
This would clearly require a huge effort to get either PHP up and running to
manage the existing PHP-based content (deo, beo and don't forget the meo
redirectors), get some form of MTA and mailing list manager up and running
including carrying across all the existing subscribers and admin privileges,
and also increasing the level of access to the weo box to allow us to
migrate and integrate these services. Retaining the existing access level
to weo while requesting this option would clearly massively increase the
risk of the 'bus scenario', or even just a delayed access scenario, where
updates and management would be required to the services.
Sounds like way too much effort to me.
> 2) Move w.e.o to a Linux platform which is what l.e.o, d.e.o, and
> b.e.o currently run on.
This would be my preferable long term goal, but there is clearly a large
engineering effort to be done to migrate the current weo CMS to a CMS
running on the same OS platform as beo/leo/deo/meo currently do. However, I
think the risk is lessened compared to option #1 as there are currently many
more pairs of eyes and hands on the raq (and subsequently on the
servermatrix platform) than there are on the weo box.
> 3) Defer the decision and just move l.e.o, d.e.o, and b.e.o with the
> intention of re-visiting the issue either through another migration
> or by going to a distributed computing model.
From the point of Just Getting Things Done, this is preferable, but I think
we should be taking a long term view here. We have decided to embark on two
or three major projects - the first is the possible CMS rewrite/migration,
and two relatively firmly decided a long time ago: the *eo redesign and
evolters.org. I would not like to have to go through a migration from the
raq to another Linux box, and then have to go through another engineering
effort to redesign everything to cater for a redesigned back end and
display/render front end.
> 4) ...
Here's how I think things should go without regard to, or intention to
bruise egos.
Project Revolt:
- immediately implement a new community-funded hosting platform
which maximises our return on investment - i.e. favour an open-
source OS if it allows us to reuse funds which may have been
allocated for OS licence fees; a package which takes advantage
of any discounts, offers, etc we can get, etc.
- immediately spec and implement a design-independent system to
manage beo, leo and deo using a similar PHP-based backend, but
retaining the capability to massively change the render output
to accomodate an *eo design change
- immediately make a choice to retain the existing weo CMS, or
migrate it to the new hosting platform - this is, at a higher
level, a choice to fully rely on the community-funded hosting
platform, or continue to rely on a goodwill hosting platform.
- if the choice is made to retain the existing CMS, immediately
spec and implement an increased level-of-access programme to
allow greater numbers of eyes and hands on both the weo box
and weo codebase
- if the choice is made to migrate the CMS to the new hosting
platform, immediately begin a scoping and design process to
identify and consider implementing a CMS which will meet the
existing CMS process and functionality level, while retaining
or increasing both performance and functionality improvement
capability. In line with the redesign process, the CMS will
be integrated into any redesign, and a working prototype will
be produced within an agreed timeframe
- immediately migrate leo services to the new hosting platform,
taking into consideration third-party services which we host
based on goodwill (i.e. css-d) and enable them as soon as
possible with full regard to time for testing, etc.
while leo services are being migrated, modify the lists available
as previously agreed upon as part of the reduction-of-levels
discussion
- plan *eo redesign with scoping and continuance of previous
design mockups with a view to a working prototype within
an agreed timeframe.
- plan evolters.org in parallel with the redesign process with a
view to a working prototype within an agreed timeframe.
Did I miss anything?
--
_ __/| William Anderson | Brodie: The Force is strong with this one
\`O_o' neuro at well dot com | Jay: Dude, don't encourage him
=(_ _)= http://neuro.me.uk/ | -- Mallrats, (1995)
U - Thhbt! GPG 0xFA5F1100 |
More information about the theforum
mailing list