Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of mramm@geek.net designates
 74.125.149.82 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP-ksohurqdkGdDOCDep82CfJ1Gd24P-A6fF7dQRWxVcwc2f5w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4F907AF2.4080806@gmail.com>
	<CAP-ksohg9=RW4YrSptuFQfScuc2r2v4GMpL1wW36kThzCP14NQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F90857E.50105@gmail.com>
	<CAP-ksohurqdkGdDOCDep82CfJ1Gd24P-A6fF7dQRWxVcwc2f5w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:57:15 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAJicGc_MBu3LBFyGsNrAiJFg5_NA-QdphDuC=LM2Kc_+Zrp5zA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: mirrors, release publishing...again
From: Mark Ramm <mark@geek.net>
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> A few ways, some worse than others:
>
> 1) Offer several download links: =A0"Download from Apache, from
> SourceForge, from MirrorBrain". Of course that doesn't balance the
> load, but maybe it would if we randomized the order that they are
> listed.
>
> 2) Have a single link, but it is JavaScript that then directs to one
> of the three mirrors systems. =A0This is easy to distribute the load
> according to a defined schedule. =A0Marcus prototyped an approach like
> this. It looked like it was working. =A0I'm not sure, however, whether
> it handled fallbacks. =A0For example, you randomly select to use the
> Apache mirror, but the particular operator chosen is down. =A0User
> experience for backing out of that and repeating was as nice as it
> could be.
>
> 3) Some variation on 3 where we handle the fallbacks better, or at
> least handle failures better, so the user just needs to click again.

I would be in favor of a forth option suggested by Andreas in another threa=
d:

* Route "autoupdater" traffic through one system (MirrorBrain)
* Route web based traffic through another (SF as primary, and Apache
mirrors as secondary)

This eliminates potential problems with "which mirror network is
having a problem" kinds of debugging which would be particularly
pernicious if we randomized anything about the process. It also has
the=A0benefit=A0of most closely matching Joe's=A0original=A0suggestion of h=
ow
to use SF.net, and provides a clear=A0accountability/support chain for
users when downloads fail.

SF.net will as previously mentioned provide an API to collect stats on
downloads from our system, and we'd be happy to help host a bouncer
that forwards requests to a MirrorBrain server so that updater stats
can be collected as well if that helps the team measure the release
download volume more effectively.

--Mark Ramm
=3D=3D=3D=3D
This e- mail message is intended only for the named recipient(s) above. I=
t may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the=
 intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distr=
ibution or copying of this e-mail and any attachment(s) is strictly prohi=
bited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately noti=
fy the sender by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any a=
ttachment(s) from your system. Thank you.
=0D