You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> on 2016/09/24 12:35:45 UTC
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Excellent cliff notes, and I'm really glad to see us surfacing the
issues - and costs - of incubating such a large podling.
Question: do you have a rough forecast of how long this expense/extra
infra burden will last? I.e. is this likely something we'll bear for
3-4 years and then we'll have migrated everything to a better home, or
is this a long-term cost due to how big it all is?
- Shane
Daniel Gruno wrote on 9/24/16 6:17 AM:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've been going over the requirements for NetBeans infrastructure, it's
> ballpark costs, bandwidth, machines needed and so forth, and the cliff
> notes are as follows:
>
> - 40-50TB/month in traffic required (mostly downloads+plugins)
> - 8-13 machines/VMS are required
> - Ballpark hardware costs are between $3k and $10k per year, depending
> on how much we can move to existing infrastructure and how close we
> come to the original setup. The most likely figure we are working with
> is $4.9k, but we should be prepared for a larger cost, just in case.
> - The maintenance will be split between infra (downloads, web site, CI,
> new build machines) and the project (services, plugins, statistics),
> which will undoubtedly incur additional costs in terms of infra time
> spent on this, possibly to the tune of $10-20k in the initial phase.
>
> Certain services like the plugins hosting will rely on Legal giving the
> go-ahead for it, otherwise we'll have to find other people willing to
> host this.
>
> Other items like downloads may be offset by CDN providers offering their
> assistance, but we should be prepared for this not being the case from
> the beginning, thus the 40-50TB/month. Likewise, some machine costs
> may be offset by cloud providers offering services for free.
>
> Thus, I would submit to the IPMC that they consider asking the board for
> a budget of roughly $10k per year for the NetBeans project, as well as
> the additional time required of Infrastructure to implement this into
> the existing ASF infra. As we may be able to pool resources and utilize
> the new hardware for multiple projects, the cost may go down in the
> coming years, but this is the baseline I suggest we consider when
> approving NetBeans as a new podling.
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
>
> My guess is that the first 6 months is the most expensive as it
> involves a lot of time from infrastructure to migrate resources or
> figure out alternatives. My guess is, based on Daniels estimate, that
> first year is 13-30k - each year thereafter is 3-10k per year in costs
> (whether those be monetary, staff time, or in-kind)
> Any service that we stand up and migrate I assume is staying forever
> or only growing larger.
The preliminary NetBeans cost findings cover monetary costs only. Staff
time is not covered. I am not sure what "in-kind" means, though it is not
covered either. I can definitely imagine that indeed there will (and has
already been, e.g., in the drawing up of the preliminary cost findings) be
staff time costs, i.e., from Apache infra side, in moving NetBeans to
Apache.
The preliminary NetBeans cost findings have determined that of the existing
NetBeans services, the ones that carry a monetary burden for Apache are (1)
plugins.netbeans.org, which will not be going to Apache, (2)
statistics.netbeans.org, which will not be going to Apache, and (3) the
MacOS build machines. In fact, the cost findings clearly estimate that only
the MacOS build machines will be a cost factor for Apache.
Gj
Gj
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 5:57 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>
> wrote:
> > Excellent cliff notes, and I'm really glad to see us surfacing the
> > issues - and costs - of incubating such a large podling.
> >
> > Question: do you have a rough forecast of how long this expense/extra
> > infra burden will last? I.e. is this likely something we'll bear for
> > 3-4 years and then we'll have migrated everything to a better home, or
> > is this a long-term cost due to how big it all is?
> >
>
> My guess is that the first 6 months is the most expensive as it
> involves a lot of time from infrastructure to migrate resources or
> figure out alternatives. My guess is, based on Daniels estimate, that
> first year is 13-30k - each year thereafter is 3-10k per year in costs
> (whether those be monetary, staff time, or in-kind)
> Any service that we stand up and migrate I assume is staying forever
> or only growing larger.
>
> --David
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
If can send out the vote mail in about an hour or so if everyone is OK.
>
Bottom line -- we've discussed a lot already and we'll be discussing a lot
more during incubation.
The NetBeans community is large and diverse. Some might have less of an
understanding of this process and its consequences than others.
That is not a problem because any services and any assumptions that Apache
is unable to meet can be carried by one or more organizations -- after due
discussion and legal handling etc with Apache -- from which one or more
individual contributors will come into Apache NetBeans.
There is a lot at stake on both ends, I think -- i.e., at the end of this
process Apache gets the NetBeans codebase, domains, trademarks, and
everything else. On the other end, NetBeans gets the home its always
wanted. It's a completely equal match and will work out for everyone to the
benefit of all.
There are several precarious sliding pieces though the end goal will unite
everything.
Gj
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> On 2016-09-27 18:12, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
>> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ...I think for a lot of (NetBeans) folks lurking in these threads, it
>>> will be
>>> useful to know what voting means, who can vote, what 'binding votes' are,
>>> etc etc...
>>>
>>
>> Ok we can add that info in concise form once the vote thread starts.
>> Basically, only Incubator PMC members votes are binding (meaning
>> "legally valid" as far as the ASF is concerned), people shouldn't
>> hijack the VOTE thread for discussions (start new threads if needed)
>> and that's a majority vote that lasts >= 72 hours.
>>
>> Votes from other people are welcome as an indication of peoples
>> enthusiasm (or lack thereof).
>>
>> Geertjan, are you ok with starting the vote?
>>
>> I'm currently at a conference with little time, if another mentor
>> wants to start it that's fine with me. Make sure to include the text
>> of https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NetBeansProposal
>>
>
> If can send out the vote mail in about an hour or so if everyone is OK.
>
> Ate
>
>
>
>> -Bertrand
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 2016-09-27 18:12, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> ...I think for a lot of (NetBeans) folks lurking in these threads, it will be
>> useful to know what voting means, who can vote, what 'binding votes' are,
>> etc etc...
>
> Ok we can add that info in concise form once the vote thread starts.
> Basically, only Incubator PMC members votes are binding (meaning
> "legally valid" as far as the ASF is concerned), people shouldn't
> hijack the VOTE thread for discussions (start new threads if needed)
> and that's a majority vote that lasts >= 72 hours.
>
> Votes from other people are welcome as an indication of peoples
> enthusiasm (or lack thereof).
>
> Geertjan, are you ok with starting the vote?
>
> I'm currently at a conference with little time, if another mentor
> wants to start it that's fine with me. Make sure to include the text
> of https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NetBeansProposal
If can send out the vote mail in about an hour or so if everyone is OK.
Ate
>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
I'm very OK with starting the vote. I'd recommend leaving this to the
Apache community as much as possible, everyone from NetBeans is extremely
positive about all this so let's be reticent in this specific process, and
enable the Apache community to work through all this. That would be my
advise at this point.
Gj
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > ...I think for a lot of (NetBeans) folks lurking in these threads, it
> will be
> > useful to know what voting means, who can vote, what 'binding votes' are,
> > etc etc...
>
> Ok we can add that info in concise form once the vote thread starts.
> Basically, only Incubator PMC members votes are binding (meaning
> "legally valid" as far as the ASF is concerned), people shouldn't
> hijack the VOTE thread for discussions (start new threads if needed)
> and that's a majority vote that lasts >= 72 hours.
>
> Votes from other people are welcome as an indication of peoples
> enthusiasm (or lack thereof).
>
> Geertjan, are you ok with starting the vote?
>
> I'm currently at a conference with little time, if another mentor
> wants to start it that's fine with me. Make sure to include the text
> of https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NetBeansProposal
>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
<ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> ...I think for a lot of (NetBeans) folks lurking in these threads, it will be
> useful to know what voting means, who can vote, what 'binding votes' are,
> etc etc...
Ok we can add that info in concise form once the vote thread starts.
Basically, only Incubator PMC members votes are binding (meaning
"legally valid" as far as the ASF is concerned), people shouldn't
hijack the VOTE thread for discussions (start new threads if needed)
and that's a majority vote that lasts >= 72 hours.
Votes from other people are welcome as an indication of peoples
enthusiasm (or lack thereof).
Geertjan, are you ok with starting the vote?
I'm currently at a conference with little time, if another mentor
wants to start it that's fine with me. Make sure to include the text
of https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NetBeansProposal
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
I think for a lot of (NetBeans) folks lurking in these threads, it will be
useful to know what voting means, who can vote, what 'binding votes' are,
etc etc. From the NetBeans side of things, we're a large community and lots
of us are following all this and maybe someone can point us Apache newbies
to the precise context in which we're currently finding ourselves in right
now.
Gj
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> +1
> Ate
>
>
>
> On 2016-09-27 14:23, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, 27 September 2016, 14:11, Bertrand Delacretaz <
>>> bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:06 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sooo.... does anyone feel that this needs to wait longer before
>>>> starting a
>>>> vote?..
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm +1 for starting the vote.
>>>
>>> -Bertrand
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
+1
Ate
On 2016-09-27 14:23, Mark Struberg wrote:
> +1
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Tuesday, 27 September 2016, 14:11, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:06 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sooo.... does anyone feel that this needs to wait longer before starting a
>>> vote?..
>>
>> I'm +1 for starting the vote.
>>
>> -Bertrand
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Mark Struberg <st...@yahoo.de.INVALID>.
+1
LieGrue,
strub
> On Tuesday, 27 September 2016, 14:11, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:06 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Sooo.... does anyone feel that this needs to wait longer before starting a
>> vote?..
>
> I'm +1 for starting the vote.
>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:06 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sooo.... does anyone feel that this needs to wait longer before starting a
> vote?..
I'm +1 for starting the vote.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
Sooo.... does anyone feel that this needs to wait longer before starting a
vote?
John
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 7:06 AM Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:35 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I see moving plugins.netbeans.org out of Oracle control as being a
> > graduation goal, not a start incubation goal.
> >
>
> Agreed, with both my IPMC and InfraAdmin "hats" on my head.
>
> I see these issues having time within incubation to be sorted out. I also
> see a high likelihood that the community will succeed in those efforts.
> Further, I think over time (several years of rollout), we can get NetBeans
> better integrated into the kinds of workflow and bits-hosting approaches
> that work well for us, and possibly reduce external dependencies.
>
> One of the "big" cost items is MacOS build boxes. We can/will look into
> those, and see about cost-sharing those with other PMCs who want them. But
> *if* push comes to shove, we just won't do it. That will hurt, yes. And
> then we can all start fighting :-) ... Seriously tho ... who is gonna block
> NetBeans coming to the ASF on the potential of not having MacOS build
> slaves?
>
> Thus, the three big-hit items (plugins, stats, macos) all seem to be
> reasonably solved, or at least workable.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:35 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
> I see moving plugins.netbeans.org out of Oracle control as being a
> graduation goal, not a start incubation goal.
+1
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:35 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
wrote:
> I see moving plugins.netbeans.org out of Oracle control as being a
> graduation goal, not a start incubation goal.
>
Agreed, with both my IPMC and InfraAdmin "hats" on my head.
I see these issues having time within incubation to be sorted out. I also
see a high likelihood that the community will succeed in those efforts.
Further, I think over time (several years of rollout), we can get NetBeans
better integrated into the kinds of workflow and bits-hosting approaches
that work well for us, and possibly reduce external dependencies.
One of the "big" cost items is MacOS build boxes. We can/will look into
those, and see about cost-sharing those with other PMCs who want them. But
*if* push comes to shove, we just won't do it. That will hurt, yes. And
then we can all start fighting :-) ... Seriously tho ... who is gonna block
NetBeans coming to the ASF on the potential of not having MacOS build
slaves?
Thus, the three big-hit items (plugins, stats, macos) all seem to be
reasonably solved, or at least workable.
Cheers,
-g
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
I see moving plugins.netbeans.org out of Oracle control as being a
graduation goal, not a start incubation goal.
John
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:28 PM Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>
>
> > won't plugins.netbeans.org run for another few months with Oracle
> > infrastructure? If it does, is it urgent enough to block incubation? For
> me
> > it does not look that way.
>
>
> Indeed, this is not an urgent issue from the point of view of NetBeans. I
> feel it is an urgent point for some of those in this discussion who want to
> be sure there won't be frustration later down the line when it turns out
> that Apache will not be hosting the NetBeans plugins. Let me reiterate --
> in the same way as Maven plugins are not hosted by Apache, the NetBeans
> community is under no assumption that Apache will be hosting NetBeans
> plugins.
>
> And we will find a solution, we are working on it actively right now,
> though there is no big immediate rush for this.
>
> Gj
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Jochen Theodorou <bl...@gmx.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On 26.09.2016 17:04, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> >> b) We vote on the NetBeans proposal without waiting, and the podling
> >> assumes the risk of having to wait for budget or technical solutions
> >> to run plugins.netbeans.org at or via the ASF.
> >>
> >
> > won't plugins.netbeans.org run for another few months with Oracle
> > infrastructure? If it does, is it urgent enough to block incubation? For
> me
> > it does not look that way.
> >
> > bye Jochen
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> won't plugins.netbeans.org run for another few months with Oracle
> infrastructure? If it does, is it urgent enough to block incubation? For me
> it does not look that way.
Indeed, this is not an urgent issue from the point of view of NetBeans. I
feel it is an urgent point for some of those in this discussion who want to
be sure there won't be frustration later down the line when it turns out
that Apache will not be hosting the NetBeans plugins. Let me reiterate --
in the same way as Maven plugins are not hosted by Apache, the NetBeans
community is under no assumption that Apache will be hosting NetBeans
plugins.
And we will find a solution, we are working on it actively right now,
though there is no big immediate rush for this.
Gj
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:19 PM, Jochen Theodorou <bl...@gmx.org> wrote:
> On 26.09.2016 17:04, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> [...]
>
>> b) We vote on the NetBeans proposal without waiting, and the podling
>> assumes the risk of having to wait for budget or technical solutions
>> to run plugins.netbeans.org at or via the ASF.
>>
>
> won't plugins.netbeans.org run for another few months with Oracle
> infrastructure? If it does, is it urgent enough to block incubation? For me
> it does not look that way.
>
> bye Jochen
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Jochen Theodorou <bl...@gmx.org>.
On 26.09.2016 17:04, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
[...]
> b) We vote on the NetBeans proposal without waiting, and the podling
> assumes the risk of having to wait for budget or technical solutions
> to run plugins.netbeans.org at or via the ASF.
won't plugins.netbeans.org run for another few months with Oracle
infrastructure? If it does, is it urgent enough to block incubation? For
me it does not look that way.
bye Jochen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Jaroslav Tulach <ja...@gmail.com>.
On úterý 27. září 2016 11:27:29 CEST, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
>
> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > ...Together with Bertrand and the organizations volunteering to
> > host this service, we'll need to find terms of agreement -- which I think
> > we should try to model on those of Sonatype in relation to Apache Maven...
>
> As Mark suggested earlier there's also the option to distribute the
> binaries via Maven Central and the much smaller metadata via the
> Apache mirroring system. This would require no changes to existing
> agreements, assuming the extra load is acceptable for Maven Central.
I see. My previous email is then at least 17 hours too late. I beg your
pardon.
-jt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
<ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> ...Together with Bertrand and the organizations volunteering to
> host this service, we'll need to find terms of agreement -- which I think
> we should try to model on those of Sonatype in relation to Apache Maven...
As Mark suggested earlier there's also the option to distribute the
binaries via Maven Central and the much smaller metadata via the
Apache mirroring system. This would require no changes to existing
agreements, assuming the extra load is acceptable for Maven Central.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
PS: GitHub may be an option too, though right now we're working with two or
three different organizations, to see which would be the best home for
plugins.netbeans.org.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <
geertjan.wielenga@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Yup. For sure. Together with Bertrand and the organizations volunteering
> to host this service, we'll need to find terms of agreement -- which I
> think we should try to model on those of Sonatype in relation to Apache
> Maven.
>
> However, there are many many months of incubation ahead -- I believe that
> in those months these kinds of arrangements can be made. I am not in a
> hurry to have the vote on the proposal done. On the other hand, I don't
> believe that the finding of a home for plugins.netbeans.org should be a
> blocker for that, given that everyone recognizes the importance of
> plugins.netbeans.org and the range of organizations available who could
> be the host of that service and the fact that we are already exploring this
> with some of them.
>
> Just my 2c on this.
>
> Gj
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:11 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
>> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > We're actively discussing with various organizations about the future
>> home
>> > of plugins.netbeans.org. We'd certainly not want to go into the future
>> > without our Plugin Portal and plugins, there's no point in pointing out
>> to
>> > the NetBeans community the importance of its plugins. :-) I am
>> comfortable
>> > that we'll find a home for them in one organization or another. We have
>> no
>> > intention nor any expectation that Apache will be the future home for
>> > plugins.netbeans.org, in the same way as Maven's plugins etc are also
>> not
>> > hosted on Apache.
>> >
>> > Hope the above helps,
>> >
>>
>> It helps, but ultimately, if the project is going to come to the ASF,
>> the Foundation will have to sign off on the terms of any such
>> agreement once it comes to the ASF. I know what we have a bit of a
>> chicken-egg situation[1] , so I'd urge you to have someone involved
>> from the ASF side - your champion looks to be in an ideal place to
>> help there.
>>
>>
>> [1] http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/a+chicken+and+egg+situation
>>
>>
>> --David
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Yup. For sure. Together with Bertrand and the organizations volunteering to
host this service, we'll need to find terms of agreement -- which I think
we should try to model on those of Sonatype in relation to Apache Maven.
However, there are many many months of incubation ahead -- I believe that
in those months these kinds of arrangements can be made. I am not in a
hurry to have the vote on the proposal done. On the other hand, I don't
believe that the finding of a home for plugins.netbeans.org should be a
blocker for that, given that everyone recognizes the importance of
plugins.netbeans.org and the range of organizations available who could be
the host of that service and the fact that we are already exploring this
with some of them.
Just my 2c on this.
Gj
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:11 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > We're actively discussing with various organizations about the future
> home
> > of plugins.netbeans.org. We'd certainly not want to go into the future
> > without our Plugin Portal and plugins, there's no point in pointing out
> to
> > the NetBeans community the importance of its plugins. :-) I am
> comfortable
> > that we'll find a home for them in one organization or another. We have
> no
> > intention nor any expectation that Apache will be the future home for
> > plugins.netbeans.org, in the same way as Maven's plugins etc are also
> not
> > hosted on Apache.
> >
> > Hope the above helps,
> >
>
> It helps, but ultimately, if the project is going to come to the ASF,
> the Foundation will have to sign off on the terms of any such
> agreement once it comes to the ASF. I know what we have a bit of a
> chicken-egg situation[1] , so I'd urge you to have someone involved
> from the ASF side - your champion looks to be in an ideal place to
> help there.
>
>
> [1] http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/a+chicken+and+egg+situation
>
>
> --David
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
<ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> We're actively discussing with various organizations about the future home
> of plugins.netbeans.org. We'd certainly not want to go into the future
> without our Plugin Portal and plugins, there's no point in pointing out to
> the NetBeans community the importance of its plugins. :-) I am comfortable
> that we'll find a home for them in one organization or another. We have no
> intention nor any expectation that Apache will be the future home for
> plugins.netbeans.org, in the same way as Maven's plugins etc are also not
> hosted on Apache.
>
> Hope the above helps,
>
It helps, but ultimately, if the project is going to come to the ASF,
the Foundation will have to sign off on the terms of any such
agreement once it comes to the ASF. I know what we have a bit of a
chicken-egg situation[1] , so I'd urge you to have someone involved
from the ASF side - your champion looks to be in an ideal place to
help there.
[1] http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/a+chicken+and+egg+situation
--David
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
We're actively discussing with various organizations about the future home
of plugins.netbeans.org. We'd certainly not want to go into the future
without our Plugin Portal and plugins, there's no point in pointing out to
the NetBeans community the importance of its plugins. :-) I am comfortable
that we'll find a home for them in one organization or another. We have no
intention nor any expectation that Apache will be the future home for
plugins.netbeans.org, in the same way as Maven's plugins etc are also not
hosted on Apache.
Hope the above helps,
Geertjan
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:40 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> > <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> ...my suggestion is for infra (David or Greg) to give us their ok to
> >> proceed with the vote...
>
> > ...The Office of the President doesn't have any oversight over PMCs, so
> > strictly speaking the IPMC can proceed with this however it likes on
> > whatever timetable it sees fit...
>
> My intention as the NetBeans champion is to be collaborative, so even
> though you guys have no formal power w.r.t voting the podling in I
> think it's worth agreeing on how we proceed.
>
> > ...With my VP Infra/member/IPMC member hats on, I'd prefer seeing the
> > plan for plugins.nb.o in place before you consider this....
>
> I see two options then:
>
> a) We don't vote on the NetBeans proposal until the current NetBeans
> team + mentors have worked with infra (on this list I assume) on a
> plan for plugins.netbeans.org once NetBeans moves to the ASF. I
> suspect this can easily take two weeks.
>
> b) We vote on the NetBeans proposal without waiting, and the podling
> assumes the risk of having to wait for budget or technical solutions
> to run plugins.netbeans.org at or via the ASF.
>
> Do people agree that these options make sense, and Geertjan which one
> is your and your team's favorite?
>
> -Bertrand
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
<bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:40 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>> <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> ...my suggestion is for infra (David or Greg) to give us their ok to
>>> proceed with the vote...
>
>> ...The Office of the President doesn't have any oversight over PMCs, so
>> strictly speaking the IPMC can proceed with this however it likes on
>> whatever timetable it sees fit...
>
> My intention as the NetBeans champion is to be collaborative, so even
> though you guys have no formal power w.r.t voting the podling in I
> think it's worth agreeing on how we proceed.
Yep, my paragraph was primarily directed at those who are new and
might confuse titles with authority.
>
>> ...With my VP Infra/member/IPMC member hats on, I'd prefer seeing the
>> plan for plugins.nb.o in place before you consider this....
>
> I see two options then:
>
> a) We don't vote on the NetBeans proposal until the current NetBeans
> team + mentors have worked with infra (on this list I assume) on a
> plan for plugins.netbeans.org once NetBeans moves to the ASF. I
> suspect this can easily take two weeks.
>
This is my personal leaning, I am sure Greg and Daniel can help
provide attention in sussing out potential issues.
> b) We vote on the NetBeans proposal without waiting, and the podling
> assumes the risk of having to wait for budget or technical solutions
> to run plugins.netbeans.org at or via the ASF.
>
> Do people agree that these options make sense, and Geertjan which one
> is your and your team's favorite?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:40 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
>> ...my suggestion is for infra (David or Greg) to give us their ok to
>> proceed with the vote...
> ...The Office of the President doesn't have any oversight over PMCs, so
> strictly speaking the IPMC can proceed with this however it likes on
> whatever timetable it sees fit...
My intention as the NetBeans champion is to be collaborative, so even
though you guys have no formal power w.r.t voting the podling in I
think it's worth agreeing on how we proceed.
> ...With my VP Infra/member/IPMC member hats on, I'd prefer seeing the
> plan for plugins.nb.o in place before you consider this....
I see two options then:
a) We don't vote on the NetBeans proposal until the current NetBeans
team + mentors have worked with infra (on this list I assume) on a
plan for plugins.netbeans.org once NetBeans moves to the ASF. I
suspect this can easily take two weeks.
b) We vote on the NetBeans proposal without waiting, and the podling
assumes the risk of having to wait for budget or technical solutions
to run plugins.netbeans.org at or via the ASF.
Do people agree that these options make sense, and Geertjan which one
is your and your team's favorite?
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
<bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 5:57 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>> ...My guess is, based on Daniels estimate, that
>> first year is 13-30k - each year thereafter is 3-10k per year in costs..
>
> Are these estimates sufficient for our infra team to give us their ok
> to proceed with the NetBeans vote, or do you guys need more time?
>
> I'm asking because
>
> a) discussions about the current proposal are currently going into all
> kinds of side tracks which are not really useful as far as informing
> the NetBeans vote decision, IMO
>
> and b) as it's the first time we do such an assessment for an incoming
> podling, IMO we shouldn't make NetBeans wait more than strictly
> needed, while we refine this costing thing internally.
>
> So my suggestion is for infra (David or Greg) to give us their ok to
> proceed with the vote if you guys agree, and sort out the (important)
> budget details internally in parallel.
>
The Office of the President doesn't have any oversight over PMCs, so
strictly speaking the IPMC can proceed with this however it likes on
whatever timetable it sees fit. However, please don't be surprised
if/when we deny requests to Infrastructure because they exceed what we
have available in time/staff/money; we're also likely to push a number
of tasks down to the podling itself.
With my VP Infra/member/IPMC member hats on, I'd prefer seeing the
plan for plugins.nb.o in place before you consider this. As Greg said
elsewhere, I don't think that piece can be ignored - it's vital to the
community, and any agreement would need to be formally agreed to by
the foundation (similar to the contract we have with Sonatype) if the
project moved here. I'd also point out the comments from Ross to the
IPMC about budget and get that squared away before you proceed.
--David
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 5:57 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> ...My guess is, based on Daniels estimate, that
> first year is 13-30k - each year thereafter is 3-10k per year in costs..
Are these estimates sufficient for our infra team to give us their ok
to proceed with the NetBeans vote, or do you guys need more time?
I'm asking because
a) discussions about the current proposal are currently going into all
kinds of side tracks which are not really useful as far as informing
the NetBeans vote decision, IMO
and b) as it's the first time we do such an assessment for an incoming
podling, IMO we shouldn't make NetBeans wait more than strictly
needed, while we refine this costing thing internally.
So my suggestion is for infra (David or Greg) to give us their ok to
proceed with the vote if you guys agree, and sort out the (important)
budget details internally in parallel.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote:
> Excellent cliff notes, and I'm really glad to see us surfacing the
> issues - and costs - of incubating such a large podling.
>
> Question: do you have a rough forecast of how long this expense/extra
> infra burden will last? I.e. is this likely something we'll bear for
> 3-4 years and then we'll have migrated everything to a better home, or
> is this a long-term cost due to how big it all is?
>
My guess is that the first 6 months is the most expensive as it
involves a lot of time from infrastructure to migrate resources or
figure out alternatives. My guess is, based on Daniels estimate, that
first year is 13-30k - each year thereafter is 3-10k per year in costs
(whether those be monetary, staff time, or in-kind)
Any service that we stand up and migrate I assume is staying forever
or only growing larger.
--David
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Posted by Ross Gardler <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
Daniel, this is excellent. Thank you. When we brought AOO in we offset some costs, such as bandwidth, through our arrangement with SourceForge. Can we do the same here? (I imagine this has already been discussed, I'm behind of those threads, I'm just looking for a short summary).
Shane, if the project continues at the current scale then the costs below continue indefinitely. If it grows/shrinks many of the costs grow/shrink with it (e.g. Bandwidth) others will remain constant (e.g. Build farms)
---
Twitter: @rgardler
_____________________________
From: Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>>
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2016 5:35 AM
Subject: Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>>
Excellent cliff notes, and I'm really glad to see us surfacing the
issues - and costs - of incubating such a large podling.
Question: do you have a rough forecast of how long this expense/extra
infra burden will last? I.e. is this likely something we'll bear for
3-4 years and then we'll have migrated everything to a better home, or
is this a long-term cost due to how big it all is?
- Shane
Daniel Gruno wrote on 9/24/16 6:17 AM:
> Hi folks,
>
> I've been going over the requirements for NetBeans infrastructure, it's
> ballpark costs, bandwidth, machines needed and so forth, and the cliff
> notes are as follows:
>
> - 40-50TB/month in traffic required (mostly downloads+plugins)
> - 8-13 machines/VMS are required
> - Ballpark hardware costs are between $3k and $10k per year, depending
> on how much we can move to existing infrastructure and how close we
> come to the original setup. The most likely figure we are working with
> is $4.9k, but we should be prepared for a larger cost, just in case.
> - The maintenance will be split between infra (downloads, web site, CI,
> new build machines) and the project (services, plugins, statistics),
> which will undoubtedly incur additional costs in terms of infra time
> spent on this, possibly to the tune of $10-20k in the initial phase.
>
> Certain services like the plugins hosting will rely on Legal giving the
> go-ahead for it, otherwise we'll have to find other people willing to
> host this.
>
> Other items like downloads may be offset by CDN providers offering their
> assistance, but we should be prepared for this not being the case from
> the beginning, thus the 40-50TB/month. Likewise, some machine costs
> may be offset by cloud providers offering services for free.
>
> Thus, I would submit to the IPMC that they consider asking the board for
> a budget of roughly $10k per year for the NetBeans project, as well as
> the additional time required of Infrastructure to implement this into
> the existing ASF infra. As we may be able to pool resources and utilize
> the new hardware for multiple projects, the cost may go down in the
> coming years, but this is the baseline I suggest we consider when
> approving NetBeans as a new podling.
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>