One of the proposed Future SIGs (http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup) is the Hosting (or "Web Hosters") SIG. Since Web Hosters are one of the key and core users of CentOS, this seems like a SIG that should be started sooner, rather than later :)
I'd like to propose that such a SIG be started.
Following the proposed requirements listed:
* The topic for the group must be related to CentOS, or a use scenario for CentOS.
This is an obvious alignment. As noted above, CentOS is a popular choice for Web Hosters and ISPs. -- * There must be adequate control and feedback into the CentOS community
Such feedback would be vital to the success of this SIG. -- * Generally, all communication as to the work of the SIG should be public, understanding that sometimes a matter may need to be private; in such cases, please consult with the Devteam member out of band of the SIG.
My preference would be to use public, archived lists for all development and communication. -- * All code produced within the SIG must be compatible with a FOSS license presently used by CentOS; if a new license is wanted, again, please consult with the Devteam member
My preference that all new code and development be under the ALv2 license. -- * All documentation produced within the SIG must be compatible with the license of this wiki
Agreed. -- * We would expect teams to be watchful of general CentOS directions from the Devteam
My expectation would be an extremely tight feedback loop between the Hosting SIG and the general CentOS direction. -- * At least one member of the SIG, who need not be the lead, needs to be a member of the CentOS Devteam.
Agreed. I welcome suggestions.
A bit about myself: Web Hosting is near and dear to my heart, having created a small ISP/Web Hosting business and helping develop the Apache HTTP server. I've been known to speak and write about web hosting.
I am currently employed by Red Hat, Inc. but this request is not being made formally with my Red Hat hat on.
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 7:06 AM, Jim Jagielski jim@jimjag.com wrote:
I'd like to propose that such a SIG be started.
+1, I have interest here too.
On 01/10/2014 10:06 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
One of the proposed Future SIGs (http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup) is the Hosting (or "Web Hosters") SIG. Since Web Hosters are one of the key and core users of CentOS, this seems like a SIG that should be started sooner, rather than later:)
I'd like to propose that such a SIG be started
Also without my red Red Hat hat on, I'm interested in this. As someone who spends entirely too much time on the #httpd IRC channel, I'd love to see more CentOS and less Debian in that space, as the default CentOS Apache httpd configs are a lot saner. ;-)
--Rich
On 01/10/2014 05:57 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
On 01/10/2014 10:06 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
One of the proposed Future SIGs (http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup) is the Hosting (or "Web Hosters") SIG. Since Web Hosters are one of the key and core users of CentOS, this seems like a SIG that should be started sooner, rather than later:)
I'd like to propose that such a SIG be started
Also without my red Red Hat hat on, I'm interested in this. As someone who spends entirely too much time on the #httpd IRC channel, I'd love to see more CentOS and less Debian in that space, as the default CentOS Apache httpd configs are a lot saner. ;-)
but the enable/disable vhosts in ubuntu is much easier
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:59:14PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
see more CentOS and less Debian in that space, as the default CentOS Apache httpd configs are a lot saner. ;-)
but the enable/disable vhosts in ubuntu is much easier
Increasingly off topic here, but seriously, *this*.
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Lars Kellogg-Stedman lars@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:59:14PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
see more CentOS and less Debian in that space, as the default CentOS Apache httpd configs are a lot saner. ;-)
but the enable/disable vhosts in ubuntu is much easier
Increasingly off topic here, but seriously, *this*.
(While still off topic) So, who can stop Ubuntu's outrageous growth?
http://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux/all/q
Akemi
Hello Akemi,
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:09:22AM -0800, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Lars Kellogg-Stedman lars@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:59:14PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
see more CentOS and less Debian in that space, as the default CentOS Apache httpd configs are a lot saner. ;-)
but the enable/disable vhosts in ubuntu is much easier
Increasingly off topic here, but seriously, *this*.
(While still off topic) So, who can stop Ubuntu's outrageous growth?
http://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux/all/q
Current images of CentOS Linux for the major cloud providers, public and private.
best regards,
Florian La Roche
On 01/10/2014 06:23 PM, Florian La Roche wrote:
Hello Akemi,
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:09:22AM -0800, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Lars Kellogg-Stedman lars@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:59:14PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
see more CentOS and less Debian in that space, as the default CentOS Apache httpd configs are a lot saner. ;-)
but the enable/disable vhosts in ubuntu is much easier
Increasingly off topic here, but seriously, *this*.
(While still off topic) So, who can stop Ubuntu's outrageous growth?
http://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux/all/q
Current images of CentOS Linux for the major cloud providers, public and private.
thanks for the reminders :) I'm on it... and soon you will be able to as well.
I just need enough lemmings in the system to move the boulders around a bit
- KB
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014, Akemi Yagi wrote:
(While still off topic) So, who can stop Ubuntu's outrageous growth?
http://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux/all/q
1. Why stop it? FOSS advocacy is not a competition, and the opponents are not other Linux or other FOSS distributions
2. The chart is in percentages (as though we are considering the universe a fixed diameter 100 pct pie) -- but ... the pie size is not static. Unit counts over time would be more useful to plan from
- -- end ================================== .-- -... ---.. ... -.- -.-- Copyright (C) 2014 R P Herrold herrold@owlriver.com My words are not deathless prose, but they are mine. deb40aeae6c18ff17d4d6ae70255a011
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:52 PM, R P Herrold herrold@owlriver.com wrote:
(While still off topic) So, who can stop Ubuntu's outrageous growth?
http://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux/all/q
- Why stop it? FOSS advocacy is not a competition, and the
opponents are not other Linux or other FOSS distributions
I disagree with that statement. To whatever extent they differ, the improvements in one don't help improve the other. And with FOSS, the number of users ultimately affect the contributed improvements even if only a small percentage participate. So advocate for use of the thing you want improved the most.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 01/10/2014 12:52 PM, R P Herrold wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014, Akemi Yagi wrote:
(While still off topic) So, who can stop Ubuntu's outrageous growth?
http://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux/all/q
- Why stop it? FOSS advocacy is not a competition, and the
opponents are not other Linux or other FOSS distributions
- The chart is in percentages (as though we are considering the
universe a fixed diameter 100 pct pie) -- but ... the pie size is not static. Unit counts over time would be more useful to plan from
I mostly agree with Russ on this point. I don't intend to compete with Ubuntu. I want to make CentOS better and more appealing to a broader audience.
Simply going after Ubuntu won't accomplish this. We can learn from both their successes and their failures as we work on our own projects.
- -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77
On 01/10/2014 08:09 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Lars Kellogg-Stedman lars@redhat.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 05:59:14PM +0200, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
see more CentOS and less Debian in that space, as the default CentOS Apache httpd configs are a lot saner. ;-)
but the enable/disable vhosts in ubuntu is much easier
Increasingly off topic here, but seriously, *this*.
(While still off topic) So, who can stop Ubuntu's outrageous growth?
http://w3techs.com/technologies/history_details/os-linux/all/q
As long as on arm - despite Hansg's efforts, fedora is nothing but a toy ( I might be mistaken but NO board that I know of has proper graphics support in Fedora ), - centos does not exist (redsleeve tries its best but unless you know from the start what you were looking for you need to look hard for it in order to find references), - debian (cubian, cubieez ) sticks with old packages, ubuntu and derivatives (linaro being the most prominent example but xubuntu, mint, voyager and others exist ) will rule . Unless arch or gentoo come strongly from behind, which I sincerely doubt ( and hope that will not happen)
and in the web-hosting business, debian and ubuntu erode strongly the former centos/RHEL market. maybe introduction of SCL will change something but I doubt. people look at the versions, they see that there is no straight forward support for Shiny.New.2015 and look somewhere else. Very very few analyze if a) they really need that new version b) if that version can be used in RHEL/CentOS. Leaving aside that there is also a logic in "I do not need the shiny version now but I might need tomorrow. Why bother installing centos and an old version when I can go straight to Ubuntu and the new one?"
but, last but not least .. are we really in a competition ? I sincerely do not care [too] much which distro (or even unix flavor) is used as long as a) it's opensource and b) allows me to preserve my sanity while doing maintenance ( there are 2-3 distros which do not qualify )
wolfy "pfsense + carp or not ?"
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 5:42 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wolfy@nobugconsulting.ro wrote:
people look at the versions, they see that there is no straight forward support for Shiny.New.2015 and look somewhere else. Very very few analyze if a) they really need that new version b) if that version can be used in RHEL/CentOS. Leaving aside that there is also a logic in "I do not need the shiny version now but I might need tomorrow.
And there are often good bug/security fix reasons to think you need versions beyond the packages in RHEL/Centos. Those fixes might in fact have been backported but it is a lot harder to find out than just looking at the revision numbers.
On 01/11/2014 05:06 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
And there are often good bug/security fix reasons to think you need versions beyond the packages in RHEL/Centos. Those fixes might in fact have been backported but it is a lot harder to find out than just looking at the revision numbers.
A lot of times these boil down to the user side in a specific demographic - so we need better communication to that audience.
On 01/10/2014 09:57 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
On 01/10/2014 10:06 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
One of the proposed Future SIGs (http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup) is the Hosting (or "Web Hosters") SIG. Since Web Hosters are one of the key and core users of CentOS, this seems like a SIG that should be started sooner, rather than later:)
I'd like to propose that such a SIG be started
Also without my red Red Hat hat on, I'm interested in this. As someone who spends entirely too much time on the #httpd IRC channel, I'd love to see more CentOS and less Debian in that space, as the default CentOS Apache httpd configs are a lot saner. ;-)
--Rich
Replying here to bring things back mostly on-topic :-)
I've had several hosting providers express an interest in this area as well, however most aren't on the -devel list. I'm going to invite them to the mailing list so that they can participate as well. I propose we allow ourselves a week or so to gather the interested parties so that we can start laying the groundwork here.
Does this work for everyone?
+1 On Jan 10, 2014, at 1:24 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:
On 01/10/2014 09:57 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
On 01/10/2014 10:06 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
One of the proposed Future SIGs (http://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup) is the Hosting (or "Web Hosters") SIG. Since Web Hosters are one of the key and core users of CentOS, this seems like a SIG that should be started sooner, rather than later:)
I'd like to propose that such a SIG be started
Also without my red Red Hat hat on, I'm interested in this. As someone who spends entirely too much time on the #httpd IRC channel, I'd love to see more CentOS and less Debian in that space, as the default CentOS Apache httpd configs are a lot saner. ;-)
--Rich
Replying here to bring things back mostly on-topic :-)
I've had several hosting providers express an interest in this area as well, however most aren't on the -devel list. I'm going to invite them to the mailing list so that they can participate as well. I propose we allow ourselves a week or so to gather the interested parties so that we can start laying the groundwork here.
Does this work for everyone?
-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
-
Akemi Yagi -
Florian La Roche -
Jeff Sheltren -
Jim Jagielski -
Jim Perrin -
Karanbir Singh -
Lars Kellogg-Stedman -
Les Mikesell -
Manuel Wolfshant -
R P Herrold -
Rich Bowen