[SR-Users] RFC: infrastructure upgrade - git, tracker, ...

Hello, as most of you know, we have a rather distributed infrastructure, with servers provided from different companies or persons. We came to the time when one of the servers is too old and considered to be decommisioned, so we have to decide how to move on. It is about sip-router.org, who was offered/sponsored by courtesy of Jan Janak. From project point of view, the server hosts: - git repository - bug tracker - website and wiki under domain sip-router.org Given that no matter what we like, there is work to do, I am looking to see what are the best options out there for everyone involved in the project. The sip-router.or wbesite and wiki, which are not really updated anyhow, will be relocated as virtual host in kamailio.org server and made static for historic purposes. For git and tracker, I thought of two variants: 1) move to use an external hosting service - the first candidate and perhaps the only to be considered is GitHub, we have there already a real time mirror of git repository. Then we should get a read only mirror to kamailio.org. If the tracker on github is good enough for everyone, then we will use it. I could see quickly that lot of kamailio developers already have an account on github. 2) get a new server and relocate those components there. It will need to be configured from scratch and the components eventually updated to use latest versions. In case of tracker, we have eventually to re-evaluate if flyspray worth keeping, as we had several discussions, due to the fact that the project doesn't seem to be very active. My personal preference at this moment is 1), given that offloads administration works from project. For 2) we will need someone to commit to a sysadmin job for long time. As probably you noticed lately, serious security vulnerabilities can appear and someone needs to take care of proper maintenance of the server. I don't want to get all services on kamailio.org, as it has other critical components (mailing lists, releases, website, ...) and messing it or overloading doesn't make sense. There is no real pressure to come to a decision, we can still rely on the server for a while, but I would rather not postpone it for long. While users are encouraged to give their opinion, I feel that existing developers should have the main role in decision, being something that impacts them directly. Your preference? Any other opinions? Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel-Constantin Mierla http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda Kamailio Advanced Training, Nov 24-27, Berlin - http://www.asipto.com