#6690 Technical evaluation for Django + PG web app in Fedora Infrastructure
Closed: Fixed 7 months ago by jflory7. Opened 10 months ago by jflory7.

Summary

Seeking technical approval to host and run a Django web app as part of a GSoC / Outreachy proposal by Friday, Feb. 16 if possible

Background

Members of CommOps are hoping to mentor a GSoC / Outreachy project that works with a student to add FAS / Ipsilon and fedmsg integration to Happiness Packets.

cc: @bee2502 @jonatoni @x3mboy @bt0dotninja @bex

Details

Before committing to the proposal, we wanted to check with Infrastructure to make sure this is logistically possible to host and run inside of Fedora. CommOps is aware of the avoidance of hosting more web applications but felt the simplicity of this application would be sustainable to manage. The upstream project is "mature" and does not have major releases / changes.

The stack behind this web app:

  • Python + Django
  • PostgreSQL database (storing sent messages)
  • SMTP (outgoing email)

Action

Seeking approval from Infrastructure Team by Friday, Feb. 16 if possible to proceed further on this project proposal, since it involves hosting a new application inside of Fedora Infrastructure


A few questions:

  • Is django a requirement?
  • How much support would you like from the Fedora infrastructure?
  • Who is going to be in charge of the application long term?

You may find some information about the process of having something hosted in our infra at: https://docs.pagure.org/infra-docs/sysadmin-guide/sops/requestforresources.html

Note that we discussed a few times setting support expectation using different domain names, something like:

  • fedoraproject.org -> fully supported, someone on call if it goes down, if it breaks we'll look into it
  • fedorainfracloud.org -> we provide the machines and help you get it set up but we're not responsible for it, won't fix it, won't wake up in the middle of the night if it goes down (but if you want to be on-call for it, we'll make it page you ;-))
  • fedoracommunity.org -> associated with Fedora, but entirely outside of the infrastructure.

So where would you want to run the application?

Is django a requirement?

Yes, as I understand it.

How much support would you like from the Fedora infrastructure?

Minimal. Initial setup is where I see most of the help needed. Otherwise, the app should be self-servicing. Type of work I would see needing help from Infrastructure on is maintaining the outgoing mail functionality, since that's the only outgoing activity from the project.

The work proposed for the GSoC / Outreachy slot is the most significant work on the project – the upstream project is regarded as "mature" and its function is relatively simple, so from my POV, I don't see it as a time-draining service to host inside of Infrastructure.

Who is going to be in charge of the application long term?

CommOps can take responsibility for this. We can set the project's email response address to the commops-owner@lists.fp.o address.

fedoraproject.org -> fully supported, someone on call if it goes down, if it breaks we'll look into it

It would be nice to have the service hosted on the domain and to receive support, but only as a "during work hours" type of priority.

The service should remain online and functional. If it goes down, it should go back online but it's not mission critical or worth paging someone early in the morning to get it back online. But it would be helpful to have the support from Infrastructure as a lower priority item if something does go wrong.

I think fedorainfracloud may be a better place for it then.

I think fedorainfracloud may be a better place for it then.

I agree, especially in this short timeframe. You can always go through the RFR process to bring it up in fedoraproject.org later.

If a cloud instance is acceptable for now, we will need:

  • what os you want (note that django is... difficult in rhel/centos due to deps, and fedora has very new django that older projects might not support yet).
  • what memory/cpu/disk you will need
  • If you need a persistent volume to store database/persistent data on.
  • what fas accounts should be given access.

@kevin Thanks for this feedback. @bee2502 and @jonatoni, the project mentors, are waiting to receive any interested applicants before moving forward with this. They will add a comment to answer these questions in March if we have a student.

Great, feel free to re-open this or file a new ticket if things are going to move forward here.

Thanks!

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue close_status updated to: Fixed
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

10 months ago

@kevin I'm re-opening the ticket so we can move forward. Our accepted GSoC student @algogator need to start working on this asap.

I think fedorainfracloud may be a better place for it then.

I agree, especially in this short timeframe. You can always go through the RFR process to bring it up in fedoraproject.org later.

Yeah, we think the same, fedorainfracloud would be better.

If a cloud instance is acceptable for now, we will need:

what os you want (note that django is... difficult in rhel/centos due to deps, and fedora has very new django that older projects might not support yet).

We thought CentOS would be easier for long-term support - so it will be easier to maintain the infrastructure with CentOS than Fedora since it updates less often.

what memory/cpu/disk you will need

Memory 4 Gib and disk 50GB to start with, we think that will be enough. It's easy to add more later if needed.

If you need a persistent volume to store database/persistent data on.
what fas accounts should be given access.

Please give access to @jonatoni @algogator @jflory7 @bee2502

Thanks.

Metadata Update from @codeblock:
- Issue assigned to codeblock
- Issue status updated to: Open (was: Closed)

7 months ago

@codeblock do we have any updates on this? @algogator really needs this for her GSoC project she is working on this summer.

@jonatoni Done - should be good to go and able to ssh to happinesspackets.fedorainfracloud.org

Metadata Update from @codeblock:
- Issue close_status updated to: Fixed
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

7 months ago

Hi

I'm having some trouble downloading packages like gcc

Retrieving key from file:///etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-redhat-release

GPG key retrieval failed: [Errno 14] curl#37 - "Couldn't open file /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-redhat-release"

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata