On 1 January 2018 at 17:57, Elaine Ashton <eash...@mac.com> wrote: > On Jan 1, 2018, at 5:20 PM, Henk P. Penning <penn...@uu.nl> wrote: > > I don't understand the "slippery slope". > Where is the "slope", and why is it "slippery" ? > -- the "how to add a sponsor logo/link" has been around for years > -- CPAN's home-page already uses javascript > How is adding 1 javascript function and 1 empty <span> a problem? > How is it worse than suggesting to users to tinker with /index.html? > > > I think the ‘slope’, from a syseng perspective is trying to solve a > problem we don’t quite understand which may have far reaching consequences > we may not want. I think the saying in programming is akin to ‘patch one > bug and create two new ones.’ ;) > > We have always acknowledged the master mirrors, including funet.fi, which > was a state/edu network who never requested such recognition. Even when I > ran search.cpan out of WashU and Webster U, neither University requested > recognition, nor complained about the resource load, which was rather > substantial, especially since the hardware was donated and we all > volunteered our time to maintain it. Hardware, storage and network > resources have become less expensive in the 20 years since that time. > > I suppose my point is that, if your concern is that the number of mirrors > is declining, the problem may be not as simple as offering sites an > opportunity to add a logo, which may later lead to a demand for > advertising, which is where the ‘slippery slope’ comes in (at least for > me). Understanding the reasons why mirrors are leaving and/or doing so in > shorter periods of time may lead to a better understanding and solution > than the current suggestion. >
I _think_ what Henk was getting at is we currently have rules that are not clear (but DO allow for a logo/link) and currently lead to people doing things we don't want, I don't think it has anything to do with the number of mirrors, now metacpan and others use fastly CDN, the concept of a 'near by' mirror isn't really relevant (though having mirrors is always good for other reasons!). Giving a simple framework to add a logo/link (maybe even copy) for the hosting mirror clarifies these rules. I agree offering a config file in /local/ is cleaner than adding a javascript file in /local/ - because that then makes it extra clearer what is and is not acceptable, and if anyone really cared could then be audited automatically. As Henk is probably the best person on the Planet to understand what Mirrors are doing and what what they want, the .json file feels like a nice solution. Hope my thoughts are useful. Leo
