Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove 'ephemeral hub' type #361

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 27, 2021

Conversation

yuvipanda
Copy link
Member

@yuvipanda yuvipanda commented Apr 27, 2021

This was supposed to be a 'binder-like' hub, with
the following config:

  1. No authentication - uses tmpauthenticator by default to let
    anyone in
  2. No persistent storage!
  3. More aggressive culling of users

The goal was to provide 'demonstration' hubs for workshops,
etc. However, there has been no current demand for this kinda
hub, and the workshops we've supported definitely wanted authentication.
The amount of customization needed is also fairly small, and can
be done on a per-hub basies without much effort.

So, let's just remove this hub type and simplfiy our code.

This removes the two ephemeral hubs we were running.
@colliand confirmed the callysto one isn't currently in use.

This was supposed to be a 'binder-like' hub, with
the following config:

1. No authentication - uses tmpauthenticator by default to let
   anyone in
2. No persistent storage!
3. More aggressive culling of users

The goal was to provide 'demonstration' hubs for workshops,
etc. However, there has been no current *demand* for this kinda
hub, and the workshops we've supported definitely wanted authentication.
The amount of customization needed is also fairly small, and can
be done on a per-hub basies without much effort.

So, let's just remove this hub type and simplfiy our code.
@damianavila
Copy link
Contributor

So, let's just remove this hub type and simplfiy our code.

  • 1 on simplifying the code base!

The amount of customization needed is also fairly small, and can
be done on a per-hub basies without much effort.

Where that customization needed (that is currently collected in the ephemeral config file) could be "saved"?
It is maybe a subject for a how-to guide specific article in the docs?

@yuvipanda
Copy link
Member Author

It is maybe a subject for a how-to guide specific article in the docs?

I think part of the problem is that these were arbitrary, and not well defined by use cases. IMO, it's ok to let them die and build up hubs based on use cases when we do get use cases.

Copy link
Contributor

@damianavila damianavila left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, I always love simplification!

@damianavila
Copy link
Contributor

IMO, it's ok to let them die and build up hubs based on use cases when we do get use cases.

Sounds reasonable to me!

@yuvipanda
Copy link
Member Author

@damianavila wanna hit merge? :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants