Talk:Future of Toolserver

September 2012

I like the idea of having multiple instances of independent [tool]servers working with replicated data. Why wouldn't the current TS continue as one of those? What are the projected costs to keep it up? Is there a 'historical TS budget' page anywhere? Is there a list of which groups / chapters / sponsors support the current TS?

To the extent that the current TS is meant to be independent of the WMF, which seems important, I think it makes sense to set it up on its own (not in a WMF data centers); is there any data that it would not have access to as a result? Has someone worked out what an alternative setup would require?

–SJ talk  14:52, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

tswiki: main page mentions some chapters which supported Toolserver but the information is not complete. The historical budget can probably be extracted from WMDE pages here on Meta but WMDE must have it in a compact form.

Erik mentioned some amounts for the value of hosting TS in WMF data centre: «space, power and racks for the toolserver cluster, at a cost of about $65,000/year to WMF according to our Director of TechOps». It's not clear whether this money will actually be saved by decommissioning the TS. It's also not clear what cost database replication has for WMF.

WMPL and WMHU have some sort of small "toolservers" for themselves, but not with replicated database of course. WMHU's server was sponsored by a local entity and cost about 10 k€. --Nemo 15:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it can be overstated how much of a disaster this would be for Commons. I know I personally have several tools running, but the loss of those would pale in comparison to the loss of CommonsHelper alone. And there are many other tools running. I'm not sure how to integrate this statement into the document. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:09, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I feel you and quote each character, punctuation included. --Elitre (talk) 22:23, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

The closing of toolserver would be a disaster for all the wikimedia projects. A lot of works will become more difficult... I hope this is only a nightmare. --Vale93b (talk) 22:41, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps I can state this more succinctly, as someone who is a programmer but who understands politics and money as well: please take from Wikimedia donations and put it into the Toolserver. It is a great help. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:30, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, i run also small "toolserver" for finnish Wikipedia. Currently it contains near realtime syncronisation of article namespace and (public) user information via Wikimedia API and non realtime versions of other data which are loaded from dumps. Box is used for running the Wikitrust/Wikipraise for finnish Wikipedia and for running things which are too slow for running in toolserver. Hardware for that is i5-3570K/32GB memory and database is running from SSD and money which i have used for that box is slightly under ~1000euros. With bit more money (eq 10k euros) one can byu computer with 256GB memory (or more) and lot of SSD based diskspace. So question about running small toolserver is not really about the money.

The real question is about how replication of data can be implemented. With one language version of Wikipedia it can be done via Wikimedia API, but with multiple Wikipedias it is not practical and with all Wikipedias it is impossible. For sites like toolserver.org should be some kind of live replication between sql-servers, possibility of loading deltas of database changes or something. Also replication method should be supported by Wikimedia foundation because in long term it can't be really worked in any otherway (it is technically possible to do, but it is not really practical). Also it is good idea for foundation to do replication because it can be used not only for toolservers, but like services like Wikitrust, Wikiwiz or DBpedia.

So the question which i am trying to ask is how we can keeped the live replication for toolserver.org as alive and how it can be extended so that other sites can be using that as well? --Zache (talk) 08:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost/2012-10-01: WMF, WMDE chiefs face up to Toolserver future

In next Wikipedia signpost there is some numbers about the operational costs of running toolserver. Article is currently very much a draft. So, is those numbers accurate, more specifically do you know how much money did the toolserver got in year 2011 and 2012? --Zache (talk) 10:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Request for Comment to request WMF support

I think that an RFC would be effective to show community interest. But what do we ask? Should the RFC ask the WMF 1. to support the Toolserver, or 2. to guarantee that the tools listed in section "Why Toolserver is important" are available until an equivalent alternative of those tools is provided?

I think, and I am serious, that the question should be more in a "What the hell is wrong with you people, why do you keep boycotting the service since the very beginning"-form. --Elitre (talk) 22:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

History

Following from Elitre's comment, above, a history of the Toolserver would be a good idea. There are 2 things which have always confused me about the toolserver. 1) Why it was hosted by WMDE instead of by the WMF and 2) Why widely-used tools were allowed to expire even if they were still working fine (instead of waiting to discontinue them until they either were no longer used or no longer worked). --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 19:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Quoting every single word from Magog, Elitre, and Philosopher. --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 10:15, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

@Philosopher, my guess: TS has a hard policy that accounts expire after 6 months in order to prevent inactivity, i.e., moribund, unmaintained tools that are no longer maintained and provide little value yet use up resources. DaB is not in the business of figuring out what is valuable and what is not, so he simply hardcoded it into the TS itself. Anyway, if you have a tool that is valuable but some day might get sick of maintaining it, the TS recommends using a multi-maintainer project. At least, all of this is what I imagine DaB would say; for the real answer, you'd have to ask him.

@Sannita: did you post in the wrong section? Your comment above is confusing in context. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:37, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

No, I didn't. I just included also your words from the section above, in my quoting. More specifically, I do share your and Elitre's worries about TS' future, and the request of clarification from Philosopher, especially the question #1: "Why it was hosted by WMDE instead of WMF?" --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 16:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I thought we had gone past the 6 months thing. Just have the people share the code of their tool if they want an account, even if under a "BY-NC" license. These coders/developers are working for us guys, just find a damn way to help them instead than rejecting them. In case someone did not notice, Wikipedia and the sister projects are not done yet, and these tools are meant for people who actually work on contents. What's the point in putting a spoke in their wheel and why do we keep shooting ourselves in the foot, is something beyond my comprehension. --Elitre (talk) 18:24, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I'm still amazed by that myself. I think this variance in social norms is one reason that there is confusion. People on both sides feel that they are "helping, not rejecting" - both the current TS and the new Labs servers have a "anyone can apply to set up an account here and get access to resources" policy. Both have some policy for what is and is not allowed. (As I understand it: on TS it's not allowed to be inactive unless you've planned ahead with a MMP.. on Labs it's not allowed to work on non-freely-licensed code.. &c.) As you say: the projects aren't anywhere close to done yet! I hope we end up with a number of well-maintained spaces to work on tools. –SJ talk  04:38, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Donating decommissioned servers

Just use old Wikimedia servers. They want to give them away to other non-profits. Why not recycle them for the toolserver cluster. Matthias (talk) 15:15, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

WOW!!! What a monumental idea! I support this! Technical 13 (talk) 13:37, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

+1 Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 11:57, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

+1 --Lexein (talk) 18:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Comment Seems a bit pointless as the toolserver is being phased out over the next year or so in exchange for mw:Wikimedia_Labs ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 13:17, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

However, they could be used for WMlabs, too! --Ricordisamoa 15:23, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that Toolserver is going to be phased out that quickly. Too much to rewrite on a new platform that seems ill defined at the moment, and decried by some app people as "anemic". I personally object to "Labs" on the basis of metaphor: a lab is where one uses tools. The tools are relatively immutable, no matter what project is set up and torn down in the lab. Based on many years of experience, I don't trust anything rigged up in a lab to have any permanence. Further, I've seen German labs, and I've seen American labs (science, computer science, chemistry, physics, material science, and even auto shop) in universities and industry, and you'll forgive my assessment: for some reason, I trust the Germans more, if funded, to keep tools clean and well maintained. --184.170.129.115 15:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

A lot of the new platform is already there, I currently run my bots and tools on it as a tester and early adopter and I have run them there for a good few months. I feel that if WM had a need for them in Labs they already would have kept them and added them but Labs is built using the same high grade servers WM run on. I have never thought of 'Tools' in that way when referring to tool labs. Can you think of a better name? ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 10:05, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Ah, there's a rub. Why not WMToolServer? I wonder if there's an in-house political reason for not having already named it/them WMToolServer in aggregate... I hope there's no bad blood, meaning, I hope nobody at WM is annoyed enough at the DE people to never allow the word "toolserver" to appear in any official documentation or other such pettiness. Are your tools publicly accessible for testing? Link? --Lexein (talk) 22:45, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

The only public tool I currently have on there is this. My bot also runs from there as well as a few others. WMLabs contains more than just tool space such as all of the projects listed here. ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 14:19, 21 April 2013 (UTC)