From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SN5IA-00018s-2k for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:42:10 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 213B0E05D5; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:41:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EFE4E0652 for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:41:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (77-253-150-60.adsl.inetia.pl [77.253.150.60]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 226AB1B4027; Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:41:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:41:28 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: corentin.chary@gmail.com, robbat2@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New third party mirrors Message-ID: <20120425184128.0f4a00d6@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <20120424130959.GB13543@falgoret> <20120424183826.499652b0@pomiocik.lan> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/GoOQQH.NiQ6x_qLBacIuAv5"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: e5d6d0ff-ce6c-4737-92fe-73eb84047b47 X-Archives-Hash: de53ae090ee2ccfffaf56f63cca1e676 --Sig_/GoOQQH.NiQ6x_qLBacIuAv5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:16:05 +0200 Corentin Chary wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny > wrote: > > On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:19:11 +0000 > > "Robin H. Johnson" wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 04:50:49PM +0200, Corentin Chary wrote: > >> > >> $ ./mirrors.py --all --count > >> > >> 297 ?? ?? http://pear.php.net > >> > >> 297 ?? ?? http://pear.php.net/get > >> > >> 88 ?? ?? ??http://pecl.php.net > >> > >> 88 ?? ?? ??http://pecl.php.net/get > >> > > These are already mirror bouncers. If you visit the above, > >> > > you'll get the closest mirror for downloading. > >> > And since there is already ~10 "mirrors" with only one actual > >> > backend, should they go to thirdpartymirrors or not ? If not, > >> > what about this pseudo-mirrors already present in > >> > thirdpartymirrors ? > >> I think we should add the pseudo-mirrors, but explicitly mark them > >> as such in the file, so that they don't get duplicate entries > >> added (eg adding us.pear, de.pear and the pear bouncer is bad. > >> Should have just the bouncer). > > > > It'd be great if we could add some kind of additional mirror > > entries, which would be used by repoman to signal missing mirror:// > > entries but won't be used for downloads. >=20 > Yep, we could put that in it too: > github http://github.com/downloads/ > https://github.com/downloads/ Per spec, portage can choose a random mirror of the list. If we put entries like that, these two will be equally possible as the preferred cloud. URL -- while they redirect one to another. We might decide on some common syntax like preceding all extra entries with '-' but I don't want to be the one deciding here. --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/GoOQQH.NiQ6x_qLBacIuAv5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAk+YKT0ACgkQfXuS5UK5QB0nuwP+KH+H3gmPa1aP3gpMhLBy7dvn KLhMK4HN4ebZawxauuYWVe5mITKrKgIo2IcqBjx+FPnXlLmixbxKIA907tIZbS2m rCXoh79XiXtMQ4d5HJ5C2In/Jmp8eGxdqabR83T3EBJz+eGxkqkAxZiYqm79j9lx AHM29KwrW1+6dMDOs6Y= =gcXN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/GoOQQH.NiQ6x_qLBacIuAv5--