Habari on shared hosting
Michael C. Harris
runs a hosting company. They currently offer their ~20,000 users a
free blog (they're running a pretty heavily customised WP, one install
for some number of n users where n > 1, I didn't get all the details).
He showed some interest in offering Habari as an alternative, once it
was a bit closer to a 1.0 release, and in helping the Habari community
optimise for this sort of shared hosting installation.
It was all casual discussion in a non-tech setting, no promises were
made, but this sounds pretty interesting to me. What do people think?
Is this interesting? Is anyone willing to put in some work to make
this happen? Should I pursue this?
cheers, Michael
--
Michael C. Harris, School of CS&IT, RMIT University
http://twofishcreative.com/michael/blog
Scott Merrill
> runs a hosting company. They currently offer their ~20,000 users a
> free blog (they're running a pretty heavily customised WP, one install
> for some number of n users where n > 1, I didn't get all the details).
> He showed some interest in offering Habari as an alternative, once it
> was a bit closer to a 1.0 release, and in helping the Habari community
> optimise for this sort of shared hosting installation.
>
> It was all casual discussion in a non-tech setting, no promises were
> made, but this sounds pretty interesting to me. What do people think?
> Is this interesting? Is anyone willing to put in some work to make
> this happen? Should I pursue this?
It certainly can't hurt to get some ideas of what challenges are
presented in this scenario, and what we might do to minimize them
going forward for Habari. If additional collaboration results, all
the better!
Graham Christensen
set properly and throws naasty exceptions (at least, last I tried) upon
installation, and doesn't explain the solution very well. This should
probably be taken care of in the installer. While the thought is that
people will be installing via FTP (most of the time) and that hosting
businesses `chown` the files to something of the webserver's, not all
FTP daemons are setup that way, nor do all shared hosting clients only
have FTP.
Graham Christensen
http://itrebal.com - Customized Web Hosting
Graham.Ch...@iamgraham.net
Owen Winkler
> I'd like to note that Habari simply expects certain permissions to be
> set properly and throws naasty exceptions (at least, last I tried) upon
> installation, and doesn't explain the solution very well. This should
> probably be taken care of in the installer. While the thought is that
> people will be installing via FTP (most of the time) and that hosting
> businesses `chown` the files to something of the webserver's, not all
> FTP daemons are setup that way, nor do all shared hosting clients only
> have FTP.
It would be extremely helpful if people could both report these issues
in Trac and explain what on their system is causing them.
I know that a bunch of folks are having issues during install, but the
practical fact is that if developers don't know how to reproduce your
issues, then we can't even begin to address them.
I have gone so far as to buy hosting at places to test install issues,
so it's not for lack of interest. If the issues aren't reported, and
it's working for everyone who is currently running Habari, then there
isn't much impetus to do any "fixing".
I suggest that as part of a round-up of bugs and features to complete
0.4 (which seems woefully overdue for release) that we all try to re-run
installs on whatever systems we have access to in whatever wacky
configurations we can muster. From there we can decide what
configurations we're going to fix, and what we're going to delay support
for - but at least know the issue.
There's nothing worse than telling someone that Habari works great only
to have them stymied by some trivial to fix but blocking installation issue.
Owen
Michael C. Harris
>
> I suggest that as part of a round-up of bugs and features to complete
> 0.4 (which seems woefully overdue for release) that we all try to re-run
> installs on whatever systems we have access to in whatever wacky
> configurations we can muster. From there we can decide what
> configurations we're going to fix, and what we're going to delay support
> for - but at least know the issue.
A large +1. Perhaps we should have a page on the wiki under
Releases/0.4 detailing what installs have been successful, and what
has been unsuccessful, with issues linked to trac. If people feel
that's a good idea, I volunteer to keep track of it, and will add
install reports sent to the list.
Michael C. Harris
>
> I'd like to note that Habari simply expects certain permissions to be
> set properly and throws naasty exceptions (at least, last I tried) upon
> installation, and doesn't explain the solution very well. This should
> probably be taken care of in the installer. While the thought is that
> people will be installing via FTP (most of the time) and that hosting
> businesses `chown` the files to something of the webserver's, not all
> FTP daemons are setup that way, nor do all shared hosting clients only
> have FTP.
The point of this conversation though is that no-one would be
installing by FTP, the hosting company would provide an installation.
We would work through any set up issues, once, with the hosting
company and none of their users would ever have to install.
Chris J. Davis
effort, as long as you keep us up-to-date.
Chris
Ali B.
I see a great opportunity here to go more public with Habari, and built a user base.
Ali B.
"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
-- Eleanor Roosevelt
Michael Bishop
On Jan 27, 11:58 pm, "Michael C. Harris" <michael.twof...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > I suggest that as part of a round-up of bugs and features to complete
> > 0.4 (which seems woefully overdue for release) that we all try to re-run
> > installs on whatever systems we have access to in whatever wacky
> > configurations we can muster. From there we can decide what
> > configurations we're going to fix, and what we're going to delay support
> > for - but at least know the issue.
>
> A large +1. Perhaps we should have a page on the wiki under
> Releases/0.4 detailing what installs have been successful, and what
> has been unsuccessful, with issues linked to trac. If people feel
> that's a good idea, I volunteer to keep track of it, and will add
> install reports sent to the list.
wiki, we should just confirm these for a .4 release, IMO.
~miklb
Michael C. Harris
Agreed, but this is a bigger issue than just supported hosts. I can
test Jumba from that list, but I can also test all sorts of other
configurations on boxes to which I have access.
Michael C. Harris
>
> I am all for this. I feel comfortable with you spear-heading the
> effort, as long as you keep us up-to-date.
Of course, obsessively :)
Michael Bishop
On Jan 28, 6:04 pm, "Michael C. Harris" <michael.twof...@gmail.com>
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 02:46:34PM -0800, Michael Bishop wrote:
>
> > On Jan 27, 11:58 pm, "Michael C. Harris" <michael.twof...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 11:41:17PM -0500, Owen Winkler wrote:
>
> > > > I suggest that as part of a round-up of bugs and features to complete
> > > > 0.4 (which seems woefully overdue for release) that we all try to re-run
> > > > installs on whatever systems we have access to in whatever wacky
> > > > configurations we can muster. From there we can decide what
> > > > configurations we're going to fix, and what we're going to delay support
> > > > for - but at least know the issue.
>
> > > A large +1. Perhaps we should have a page on the wiki under
> > > Releases/0.4 detailing what installs have been successful, and what
> > > has been unsuccessful, with issues linked to trac. If people feel
> > > that's a good idea, I volunteer to keep track of it, and will add
> > > install reports sent to the list.
>
>
> Agreed, but this is a bigger issue than just supported hosts. I can
> test Jumba from that list, but I can also test all sorts of other
> configurations on boxes to which I have access.
>
most common environments and browsers that support the minimum
requirements (at this point at least). Having a separate list of more
custom environments with caveats certainly would be beneficial for the
dev crowd.
~miklb