www-mirrors mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Henk P. Penning" <he...@cs.uu.nl>
Subject Re: Mirror reorganization
Date Tue, 13 Aug 2002 20:16:58 GMT
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Aaron Bannert wrote:

> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 12:35:47 -0700
> From: Aaron Bannert <aaron@clove.org>
> To: Henk P. Penning <henkp@cs.uu.nl>
> Cc: "mirrors@apache.org" <mirrors@apache.org>,
>      "infrastructure@apache.org" <infrastructure@apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Mirror reorganization
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 08:44:09PM +0200, Henk P. Penning wrote:
> >   your problem and fine proposal assume that mirrors carry
> >   the 'historical' stuff. If mirrors only carried the 'current'
> >   stuff the problem would go away, and some maintenance would
> >   become less critical (the index.html's you propose are great,
> >   but leave ftp users 'in the cold').
> I wasn't aware that the ASF did any FTP at all, let alone though mirrors.

  See http://www.apache.org/mirrors/ ; ftp/http ~ 50/50

> FTP users can navigate to the right directory and look for the highest
> numbered version of a particular distribution, the index.html just
> makes it easier (besides, that's what HTML was designed for :).

  Hm, if http users need index.html files,
  then ftp users need README files.

> >   As I said earlier, there are reasons for the mirrors NOT to carry
> >   the 'historical' stuff : 1) confusing and 2) nobody uses them.
> I disagree. I've used my own mirror for retrieving older distributions
> on many occasions. It also serves another significant purpose: backups.

  You trust your own mirror, of course :-). I think that when Joe
  Average, on occasion, is looking for something 'odd', he/she
  would go to www.apache.org and not to a mirror. Who trusts
  all the mirrors to have everything all of the time ? Nobody.

  That's reason 1 why mirrors shouldn't carry 'old' stuff.

  ... and mirrors is not the way to organise backups.

> >   So, isn't it wise to FIRST decide if mirrors should carry
> >   the old stuff, at all ? I'm against it, but I'm flexible :-).
> You bring up a good point. What are the issues behind not wanting to
> mirror the historical distributions?

  reason 1 : see above.
  reason 2 : For Joe Average al these versions are very confusing.
             Less than 1% of the jakarta stuff is interesting for
             99% of the users.

> As a mirror admin I wouldn't mind mirroring all source/binary
> distributions.

  It's not that I mind; it's because I think it is
  useless (for experts) and confusing (for non-experts).

> As an ASF member I'd like to have our mirrors do whatever
> they can to improve reliability and reduce the bandwidth and hosting
> costs of the apache.org sites.

  I agree; So what's better, regarding the historical stuff

  1. (    serve all the mirrors the historical stuff
     AND  serve all the experts the historical stuff

  2. ONLY serve all the experts the historical stuff

  I think 2 is better. Lean, mean mirrors who don't bother
                       the source too much.

> -aaron


  Henk Penning

Henk P. Penning, Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University \__/  \
Padualaan 14, P.O. Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands. \__/
Telephone: +31-30-2534106, fax: 2513791, NIC-handle: HPP1 _/  \__/  \
News.answers http://www.cs.uu.nl/cgi-bin/faqwais     \__/  \__/  \__/

View raw message