[squeak-dev] Re: Build.squeak.org and squeaksource.com in danger (was Re: [Box-Admins] Disk space usage on box3)

karl ramberg karlramberg at gmail.com
Tue Dec 10 17:02:03 UTC 2013

Hi Ken
Thank you for all the times you helped out. I do not have much spare time
at the moment so I can not be of much help maintaining stuff.

Seems like interest in Squeak has peaked and now is in a downward slope.
But just wait another 20 years. It will come back !

Best regards,

On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Ken Causey <ken at kencausey.com> wrote:

> I want to respond to some comments made in this thread.
> First I want to admit that my posting on Friday was a bit shrill.  I was
> getting frustrated that this was my third or fourth post on this
> increasingly problematic issue and little if any action had been taken.
>  Further there seemed a real possibility that over the next few days,
> possibly over the weekend when I had little time to provide assistance,
> that the file system for the server which hosts both build.squeak.org and
> squeaksource.com would fill up.  I have seen greater than 1% per 24 hour
> increases on that server in the past.
> Thanks to Frank the immediate issue has been addressed and hopefully we
> have a couple of weeks of breathing time now to consider how best to avoid
> the issue in the future.
> There has been some discussion regarding my admittedly somewhat extreme
> comments regarding squeaksource.com.  One thing that has been mentioned
> is the idea that 'disk space is cheap'.  I think that is easy to say and
> true in general, but I'm not sure it is true in this specific case.  I will
> admit to possibly over-estimating the 'cost' but...  Keep in mind that we
> have no direct control over the configuration of either box3.squeak.organd
> box4.squeak.org.  These were contributed to us by Gandi.net at the
> request of the Software Freedom Conservancy.  Neither I nor anyone else in
> our community has any access to modify the server configuration and do
> things like add disk space.  At best we have to go through Software Freedom
> Conservancy for this.  They don't have a lot of time to spare to such
> issues themselves, further I don't think we should make assumptions that
> Gandi.net is going to be willing to donate more resources.  I'm not sure it
> is even easy to throw money at the issue given the fact that we are using
> donated resources.  But then, I may just be unreasonably pessimistic about
> this.
> Someone kindly thanked me and gave the impression that I was the only one
> that 'cared' enough to monitor the servers for such issues.  Thanks but
> don't assign me too much altruism or think that I'm so interested. The
> minor amount of daily server checking I do is largely habit for me and is
> an easy way for me to trigger a few endorphins and feel like I have in some
> way contributed for the day.
> To be honest my interest in Squeak and the community has been waning for
> some time and is quite low at this point.  Don't assume I'm going to
> continue to do what little I do indefinitely.  Someone else must step up to
> take responsibility for the Squeak servers.
> Ken
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/box-admins/attachments/20131210/ea0f8c24/attachment.htm

More information about the Box-Admins mailing list