Rubygems.org: emergency unyank gem

[mullermp]

please unyank aws-sdk-core 3.99.0

[mullermp]

@simi @dwradcliffe

[simi]

I can't do that, but I can notify people able to do that to take a look at your request.

[mullermp]

please do that as soon as you can. it's about to break a bunch of people

[mullermp]

the api is broken, getting this back from the service:

This version of the Gemcutter plugin has been deprecated.Please install the latest version using: gem update gemcutter

[mullermp]

same with the library

[8] pry(main)> c.unyank('aws-sdk-core', '3.99.0')
Gems::GemError: This version of the Gemcutter plugin has been deprecated.Please install the latest version using: gem update gemcutter
from /Users/alexwoo/.gem/ruby/2.6.5/gems/gems-1.2.0/lib/gems/request.rb:77:in `body_from_response'

[indirect]

Hi. I'm taking a look now.

[indirect]

It's back: https://rubygems.org/gems/aws-sdk-core/versions/3.99.0

[mullermp]

THANK YOU

[mullermp]

Any chance unyank API could be fixed for those who need to use it?

[indirect]

Unfortunately, the unyank API is not broken—we removed it entirely several years ago.

Yanking and unyanking causes a huge amount of frantic churn in the systems that are all trying to serve hundreds of millions of gems a day, and providing direct API access meant that we were effectively letting gem authors DoS us whenever they wanted. While it is technically fixable, it's not a high priority because legitimate unyanking is very uncommon.

However, if someone from AWS wants to volunteer to do the development, ops, and maintenance work needed to keep it functional over time, we'd probably be open to that. :)

[mullermp]

We're not opposed to taking up this work when we get the available bandwidth. We're a fairly small team owning all of the AWS Ruby SDK products. When unyank existed, did the current rate limiting mechanisms exist for yanking and publishing? Is unyank something a whitelisted account could have access to (including no rate limiting)?

[indirect]

We do have better rate limiting, or rate limit permissions, on our list, but we are also an extremely small team who all have actual day jobs doing something else to pay the rent.

If someone from your team is interested in helping with per-account rate limits, or providing unyank only to pre-authorized accounts, or other things like that, I think we would welcome the help.

[mullermp]

Account whitelisting has been a pain-point for us - some days we release 200+ gems and occasionally get throttled. We are interested in taking that on. If unyank can be available to whitelisted accounts then that would be a sweet bonus. Right now we're being asked to do re:Invent work this early into the year so that currently has our attention. Is there any special information that we would need to get started to develop on your site?

As an aside, there was another casualty yesterday - aws-sdk-batch-1.5.0 .. could I please ask for one more unyank?

[sonalkr132]

there was another casualty yesterday - aws-sdk-batch-1.5.0 .. could I please ask for one more unyank?

done

[mullermp]

Thank you!!

[simi]

Account whitelisting has been a pain-point for us - some days we release 200+ gems and occasionally get throttled. We are interested in taking that on. If unyank can be available to whitelisted accounts then that would be a sweet bonus.

@mullermp I think currently throttle is reset on successful gem push. I did some work on whitelisting accounts, but it was related to gem name squatting, which was disabled recently.

I have revived my work partially at https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems.org/compare/master...simi:verified-users-2. Anyway I'm not sure which feature could benefit from that for now.

If you have any idea feel free to ping me at https://bundler.slack.com and we can discuss it in there.

[mullermp]

@simi Thanks! I will take a look when I can.