[arch-dev-public] Putting the process of adding new mirrors on hold

Guillaume ALAUX guillaume at archlinux.org
Thu Sep 30 08:39:43 EDT 2010

On 30 September 2010 14:16, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Guillaume ALAUX <guillaume at alaux.net> wrote:
>> On 30 September 2010 11:41, Roman Kyrylych <roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Currently we have almost 90 active mirrors in the official mirror list
>>> and new requests for becoming an official mirror are appearing quite often.
>>> However, not all mirrors are good ones (outdated, incomplete, admins
>>> don't respond, etc).
>>> I marked inactive many of them during past months (including about 20
>>> during FrOSCon),
>>> and will continue to do this until all of the mirrors meet the requirements.
>>> 22 mirrors that are in the official list did not move to the 2-tier scheme yet,
>>> which means we do not know where do they sync from,
>>> admins did not respond or there is no known email address of the admin.
>>> These will be removed from the list very soon.
> If they are syncing and up-to-date
> (http://www.archlinux.org/mirrors/status/), then why remove them? That
> seems pretty silly to me. We one remaining that seems to have fallen
> off the map (unix.pl), 5 that are out of date, and one without a
> lastsync file.
>>> If you are using some mirror that was removed from the list recently
>>> and you know how to contact the admin - let me know.
>>> Considering the fact that there is no package signing support yet
>>> I don't see a reason why we should have that many mirrors,
>>> especially when they don't meet the requirements.
>>> Recently I had to defer some requests to become an official mirror
>>> from some private sites. I apologize that this caused a frustration of
>>> their admins
>>> and hope that the reasons are understandable.
>>> To make this fair to everyone I'm thinking about (temporary) putting
>>> the process of adding new mirrors on hold.
>>> --
>>> Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
>> Hi Roman,
>> On the "mirrors list page" [1] I see 56 "untiered" mirrors. May we
>> know which are the 22 you mention?
>> Just say so if you would like some help trying to get in touch with
>> some mirror admins.
> You probably missed the "active" column there.
>> For instance I see these French or Belgian mirrors :
>> These 2 were removed from the mirrorlist
>>  -ftp.belnet.be
>>  -ftp.free.fr
>> And this one is 3 weeks old and untiered:
>>  -mir1.archlinux.fr
>> I could try to mail them in French...
> No one will ever stand in your way of helping out. I'm sure you can
> chip in; if you start doing a lot you can probably get in the coveted
> "Mirror Admin" group. :P
> -Dan

Hum... that was based on the DE Arch status page
(https://www.archlinux.de/?page=MirrorStatus) but you're right, I
should rely on the ORG "mirror" and "mirror/status" :

- http://www.archlinux.org/mirrors/
- http://www.archlinux.org/mirrors/status/

That said I just check these two and they don't even have the multilib
repo nor a kernel26 that is newer than 2.6.34-1 :
Server = http://ftp.belnet.be/mirror/archlinux.org/$repo/os/$arch
Server = ftp://ftp.free.fr/mirrors/ftp.archlinux.org/$repo/os/$arch

Both were removed from the mirrorlist. I guess they belong to the 22.
I'll try to get in touch with their admins.

> if you start doing a lot you can probably get in the coveted "Mirror Admin" group. :P
That sounds way to sarcastic to be a group I want to belong to :)


More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list