On 30 September 2010 14:16, Dan McGee <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 6:56 AM, Guillaume ALAUX <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 30 September 2010 11:41, Roman Kyrylych <[email protected]> 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 However, not all mirrors are good ones (outdated, incomplete, admins 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 off the map (unix.pl), 5 that are out of date, and one without a 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 :) -- Guillaume _______________________________________________ arch-mirrors mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-mirrors
