On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:12:47AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 15:29:05 +0100 > Miroslav Suchý <msuchy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I personally do not like fedorainfracloud.org. It is fine for > > hostnames of machines in cloud. I would rather see some subdomain > > under fedoraproject.org - e.g. .devel.fedoraproject.org > > or .playground.fedoraproject.org or something similar. > > Well, it's in the cloud, so it's more descriptive, IMHO. > And sorry for the quick change, we needed new ssl certs very soon, so > thought it would make sense to get them with these names. > > > > I personally dislike the change of copr.fedoraproject.org to > > copr.fedorainfracloud.org. We have been usin this name for past two > > years and it is referenced a lot (35k by Google): > > https://www.google.com/search?lr=&hl=cs&q=%22copr.fedoraproject.org%22&oq=copr.fedoraproject.org%22 > > This is not pure technical decision but marketing decision as well. A > > lot of people are treating it as integral part of Fedora. So instead > > of changing hostname I would rather start RFR process. > > Well, for what? We have talked about moving the non builder parts of > copr into regular infrastructure in the past, but we didn't do it for > whatever reasons. Doing so would get us some advantages and some > problems: > > Advantages: could use the proxy system to cache things and also do HA > with multiple frontends or possibly even backends if we wanted. Could > mean frontend/backend/sign/git are more stable as they are not on the > cloud. > > Disadvantages: would need to figure out how to shuffle around storage, > as we have copr storage tied to the cloud right now. It would be some > work to move things around and get it all working right. > > > I think that some icon at the top or link at the bottom of page, > > which will clearly state the level of support will do the same from > > technical POV, but will be better solution from marketing POV. > > The problem with that is when the thing is down, users have no way to > look at that. They just see it's down and have the expectation that > they already do in their minds. I was talking to Kevin about this today and came up with what I think is a good solution. We have a fedoracommunity.org domain which already is provided for communities that want to set up Fedora related sites. Those sites are: * understood as owned and managed by someone other than the Fedora infrastructure team * granted trademark approval to use Fedora marks to associate closely with the Fedora Project Currently this domain is used exclusively for local communities. For example, a Czech community might run a site for Czech speaking community members at cz.fedoracommunity.org, and we simply provide a DNS pointer for them. However, the use case is exactly the same for a technical project not hosted/managed by the Infrastructure team. The owner seeks to brand it as Fedora and associate it with the Project, which is good for everyone involved. But it doesn't automatically inherit support from the team. Expanding fedoracommunity.org for this use makes a lot of sense to me. *And* it brings an immediate affiliation with Fedora just from the name, without misunderstanding. It's very clear the site is community run/supported. Thoughts? -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
