Re: [ML] Hosting of gnustep.org

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 19.01.2021 um 18:40 schrieb H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com>:
> 
> 
>> Am 19.01.2021 um 18:20 schrieb Ivan Vučica <ivan@vucica.net>:
>> 
>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 5:11 PM H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com> 
>> wrote:
>>> It did not need any maintainance in between. But it could be copied to
>>> any Linux host with apt-get install apache2 php mysql in ca. 30 minutes.
>> 
>> This assumes you're always around -- or someone else that has dealt
>> with PHP and MySQL is around.
> 
> It has to be done only once.
> 
>> 
>>> 
>>>> Existing system works, and it'll keep on working, but I am neither
>>>> submitting software to the existing system or contributing changes to
>>>> it.
>>> 
>>> Why not?
>> 
>> - The code is not in the main repos
> 
> It is on github: https://github.com/goldelico/swi
> 
> and can easily be integrated to the repos
> 
>> - The deployment procedure is unclear
> 
> Indeed, tat is a weak point, but some information is in the README.md.
> Well not about the precise installation on gnustep.org.

Ok, I have researched. It was uploaded to the same location as the homepage
through CVS. So it simply sits in the root directory of the webspace
served by www.gnustep.org. I have no idea what the host was...

Well, it could have been cvs.savannah.gnu.org:/web/gnustep

> 
>> - I don't have admin privileges to touch the database

The MySQL database is database "gnustep" running on mysql.gnustep.org.
This server resolves to mysql2.oxymium.net whoever operates that.

There is a user+password stored in the config.php as with all such
installations. So it could be possible to pull the DB as SQL-INSERT
statement format by mysqldump. Or everybody can pull it through the .plist
in XML/PList format.

In summary this means as long as the new www.gnustep.org server
has PHP and can access mysql.gnustep.org nobody should even recognise
that there was a move. So the database is not of concern.

Only running PHP on the www.gnustep.org server.

>> - Even as a regular user I don't have any sort of login credentials.
> 
> What do you need them for? The workflow is based on the assumption
> that everybody can openly contribute and reviewers/moderators delete
> spam.
> 
>> 
>>>> Moving off of it means less maintenance for whoever's running
>>>> machine underlying gnustep.org, and easier contributions by people who
>>>> can write Markdown, but not necessarily want to touch PHP.
>>> 
>>> Nobody needs to write PHP (except me as I have written the original
>>> code).
>> 
>> No other person who wants to modify the site should need to touch PHP?
> 
> In 8 years nobody wanted to modify it. And to be honest, there are more
> people proficient in PHP than in ObjC or Jekyll or others. It is not
> at all exotic.
> 
>> 
>>> You as the user do not need to work that way. Like on Wikipedia you
>>> do not get into touch with the MediaWiki code (which is also PHP + MySQL).
>>> 
>>> You just type content into the web form and press the submit button.
>> 
>> Assuming that's the only thing that should be done.
> 
> What is missing? What else should be done?
> 
>> 
>>>> Storing a list of software in a version control system seems like a
>>>> much simpler solution.
>>> 
>>> That is probably a misconception. The database *is* a version control
>>> system. Just not git.
>> 
>> How trivial is it for me to clone it to my local system *right now*
>> without having any access to the database, or any login credentials?
> 
> What is the benefit of cloning it?
> 
> Yes, the MySQL database is quite hidden somewhere on the www.gnustep.org
> server. Even I do not remember. This should be changed.
> 
>> 
>> How do I know who is the approver for the changes?
> 
> Ok, good point. These people should be listed somewhere.
> AFAIR, currently it is Riccardo and me.
> 
>> 
>>>> "It already exists" is an easy answer ignoring the question "who has
>>>> the backups, who can create the backups, who can approve the changes,
>>>> who can fork the site, and who maintains and pays for the existing
>>>> system".
>>> 
>>> There are answers, but nobody has asked yet.
>> 
>> Well now.
> 
> Fine!
> 
>> 
>>>> Static documentation sites edited via version control systems are
>>>> absolutely normal today.
>>>> 
>>>> And adding minimal interactivity via Javascript is the very reason why
>>>> Javascript came to be in the nineties.
>>> 
>>> Yes, I know the history. And because JavaScript has limitations there
>>> is still a lot of server-side activities. And PHP and MySQL became the
>>> standard after that.
>> 
>> They're less and less of a standard these days.
> 
> This is not my impression. But I may be biased.
>