[arch-dev-public] Putting the process of adding new mirrors on hold
dpmcgee at gmail.com
Thu Sep 30 12:50:20 EDT 2010
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Roman Kyrylych
<roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 15:16, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> If they are syncing and up-to-date
>> (http://www.archlinux.org/mirrors/status/), then why remove them? That
>> seems pretty silly to me.
> No known admin email address or no response.
> No known upstream.
> I agree that these may not be very solid reasons,
> but I see no other way to bring things to order.
> If we will need to change something within our mirroring scheme
> (e.g. use of mirrorbrain or geodns, or some other change)
> - we will have the problem contacting mirror admins again.
> If we would not disable rsync access for non-tier1 mirrors
> on rsync.archlinux.org we would never hear from some mirror admins,
> that I was unable to contact until their mirror stopped working
> (and BTW, some didn't even notice that at all).
> It may be that my frustration influences my view,
> so if you think I'm totally wrong - I will keep things as they are now.
First, I 100% understand the frustration.
I'm only saying keep it in perspective- if we end up making a change
that breaks these mirrors that have gone MIA, that is fine, and
indicates forward progress on some other front. But breaking them on
purpose just seems silly, if there is no need (read: forward progress)
If we ever do mirrorbrain or geodns, then we can make the necessary
changes at that time rather than doing anything ow when (as far as I'm
aware) nothing big is on the horizon, or needs to be.
I'd propose leaving these untended mirrors in the list, but *only* if
they magically stay up to date and relatively pain-free. If they begin
to lag, then mark them as inactive and they will no longer be on the
More information about the arch-dev-public