On Wed, 6 Jun 2001, Devendra Narayan wrote: > > With all these discussions about Apache mirrors, I just have this to > say : > We can guess that there would be many types of mirror sites : > > 1. Those who have enough disk space to mirror everything that Apache group > has to offer - web documents, distributions, XML-Apache, Jakarta > etc.
i think these would/should be the only official mirrors for the apache project. > 2. People like me, who are short on disk space, may just want to mirror the > web > documents and one of the dists ( httpd, Jakarta etc. ). So the web docs > module ( apache-site ) shouldn't contain any of the dists which should > all be available separately. you should be free to do this, but not expect to be considered an authoritative source of apache software. > 3. Others, who are even shorter on disk space, may want to mirror just one > dist. as per above. > Wouldn't it be great if most/all such mirror administrators could be > satisfied ? Let's just devise > a system ( using rsync ) where most/all the above needs can be satisfied and > provide > easy to use instructions for the mirror admins. In any case, all the > packages/ modules > offered for mirroring should be self contained ( with relative URLs / > pointers etc. ). i agree with the above to a certain point, but i think the line should be drawn somewhere in terms of maintenance - for a site to be considered an official apache mirror and to be listed as such, it has to provide a complete mirror (like the CPAN archive) of the whole site. mirroring for personal or semi public use (e.g company, or university or where there is no apache mirror) is fine, but isn't in the same category. > Comments or suggestions, please ? > > One question - how to instruct rsync to ignore a local file/dir/link when > mirroring ? --exclude="filename" or --exclude="directoryname/" regards, -jason
