On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 09:58 -0500, Paul Cutler wrote: > On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 08:51 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 12:35 +0100, Michael Meeks wrote: > > > Can we host a set of nearly static, seldom changed XML files for these > > > guys on http://api.gnome.org/ somewhere ? > > > > > > Clearly - it would really help to get that setup quickly :-) Paul - any > > > ideas ? > > > > > > The files we need are currently also installed for off-line use and are > > > in evolution HEAD git inside: > > > > > > evolution/capplet/settings/mail-autoconfig/ > > > > > > Under 1Mb of disk, of which we would serve sub 1k per user setting up a > > > new account. > > > > Another option might be http://projects.gnome.org/evolution/. > > > > I don't know about access times -- seems fairly snappy to me -- but the > > content there is already under source control and since I feed and care > > for the Evolution website anyway these days, I could upload the XML > > files today if you wanted. > > > > Matt > > > > _______________________________________________ > > gnome-infrastructure mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-infrastructure > > Ok, just to recap our discussion in IRC: > > 1 - We would like GNOME to host user config files for Evolution so users > can have auto-setup of their email clients by Evolution automatically > downoading a small XML file with the ISP's server settings > > 2 - This is a 1kb file that may be downloaded up to every 3 seconds for > a sustained bandwidth of 355bytes / sec - 2.8kBit > > 3 - There is a valid concern we don't want our main webserver (Window) > to have to serve this. api.gnome.org was originally suggested, but that > lives on Window already > > With that said, our best options would probably be a VM on Combobox (or > move api.gnome.org to Combobox) or possibly Signal as OSUOSL has a lot > of bandwidth (though we have some LDAP issues we'd have to fix). One > advantage of using Combobox is we want to run Snowy on it and it could > become our "GNOME Web Services" VM hosted box.
Can you explain the concern here? Every server we host, VM or not has quite significant administrative overhead, and having a completely separate server to serve a bit of static content doesn't seem warranted. - Owen _______________________________________________ gnome-infrastructure mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-infrastructure
