Mailing-List: contact mirrors-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: mirrors@apache.org
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 17:48:33 +1000 (EST)
From: jason andrade <jason@dstc.edu.au>
To: mirrors@apache.org
Subject: Re: Apache mirror system - comments
In-Reply-To: <3B1DB919.1FEECBEA@cc.kagu.sut.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.20.0106061737510.7520-100000@azure.dstc.edu.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Devendra Narayan wrote:

> 	I request you to look at it with more consideration and a historical perspective.
> There probably are many sites ( including ours ) which started mirroring NCSA htttpd
> and later Apache many years ago ( Apache since it's inception ). Now, these sites
> have been 'official' mirror sites for many years. 

well, you did ask for comments.  i'm just voicing my views - in particular based
on what i think might actually produce a workable scaleable mirror system for
a project.  it's not gospel by any means.

> 	In the meantime, however, Apache group has grown to develop a lot of
> things besides the httpd server ( XML, Jakarta etc ). Just because the previously
> 'official' mirror sites failed to mirror these new projects shouldn't be a reason to
> 'demote' them from their official status. There could be many reasons why they are
> not mirroring the new projects - lack of disk space, user interest etc.

i respectfully disagree with this.  i would love to have a situation where historical
perspective is a factor (i'd qualify for a few archives on that basis..) but the reality
is based more around having a mirror system that works - i.e users can always find
things they're looking for at the mirror (e.g from your previous comments about having
all the links relative etc), and that it requires minimal work to maintain on the part
of the software project.

the apache project at this stage is approximately 600M of disk space.  if you think lack
of diskspace is an issue, try and deal with the freebsd archive (50G ?) or redhat (80G ?
100G?).  

i would happily allocate 2G of disk to the apache project for 12 months if that guaranteed
me a mirroring system that was consistent and therefore well used.   i appreciate you
have disk shortages (i have disk shortages myself!) but given the above, some perspective
is needed.

> 	Yes, if the facilities that they have permit, they should mirror the whole thing
> but, those that have supported the distribution of the Apache httpd for so long, shouldn't
> be punished for not being able to keep up with the rapid expansion of the Apache group's
> projects.

i don't wish to denigrate anyone's archive or efforts - please don't see it as such.  i'd
just like a workable mirror system. tomorrow would be great, thanks :-)

IMHO, it won't work to have say 250 sites mirroring apache, with varying levels of up to
dateness and completeness, i'd rather see 50 sites each with a complete archive.  that
doesn't stop the other 200 sites mirroring it and making it available to users.  once
again, that's just my opinion. 

regards,

-jason