Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > Hey, look: I repeat it: if it were for me, we'd have Cocoon serving > xml.apache.org since 1999 and we'd have a much more stable software > because we'd have to deal with our own scalability problems. > > But there is good news: Covalent dedicated a machine for GUMP > (gump.covalent.net) that is a Solaris8 machine with 512Mb of RAM. Sam > Ruby is root on that machine. > > I have an account on that machine now and I'll try to setup both a > static and dynamic Forrest system. > > Then we'll decide what to do (and also, ask Covalent if they want to > handle 3 million hits/month from xml.apache.org)
There is an interesting human dynamic not to be ignored. If 3 million hits/month start going to a Covalent server, the "Apache establishment" will want this to moved to something on that is in the apache.org DNS. FYI: the root issue is that many feel that apache.org should be on a BSD base. And Sun seems determined to make it difficult to run Java on such platforms. And Apache doesn't seem to want to take on Sun on this issue. At least one of those three things needs to change. >> "Entropy is just a fact of life" IIRC ... but it ain't pleasant. > > No shit dude. But the right way to fight the system is to slowly destroy > their constrains one at a time and without them noticing until you're > done. > > In fact, you guys can enjoy xml.apache.org also because of this attitude > of mine. > > The hard part is the patience: it takes years or daily adjustements.... > but that's the art of diplomacy, I think. Exactly. First focus should be on demand generation. The rest will take care of itself. - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
