On 2011-10-22 13:22 , Daniel J. Luke wrote: > On Oct 21, 2011, at 8:39 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> Does MacPorts output any debug/info when redirects happen? If so, then yes, >> that would be a possibility. But we don't want to fire off yet another email >> to the committer/maintainer. It would be nice if it were part of the lint >> mail. > > I don't think it's a big deal to have committers/maintainers get a different > email (only if there's an issue)... We all probably deal with enough volume > that it doesn't really matter. > >> Not all http redirects are necessarily a bad thing or an indication of a >> problem. The SourceForge redirects are particularly wrong though because >> they negate the benefit of our list of SourceForge mirror servers. We ping >> them and try to direct users to a nearby server, but if all it's going to do >> is redirect the user back to the main download site because the URL was >> wrong, then it's a waste of time. We decided to keep our list of sf mirrors, >> so we should make sure they're getting used properly by rewriting sf >> master_sites that do redirects. My earlier suggestion about just checking >> the syntax of sourceforge master_sites should suffice for this. > > > We actually should probably just let the sourceforge redirect do it's 'magic' > and fallback to pinging sites and selecting a mirror from the list only if > there's a problem with the main site (it's very likely that it can do a > better job than we can of directing people to an appropriate server).
I find it does a considerably worse job. I'll often get a mirror on the other side of the country and relatively poor download speeds when going through the redirector, whereas pinging selects a local server and I get 3-4 times the throughput. - Josh _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
