jason andrade wrote:
> > 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.
Jason,
I request you to look at it with more consideration and a historical
perspective.
There probably are many sites ( including ours ) which started mirroring NCSA
htttpd
and later Apache many years ago ( Apache since it's inception ). Now, these
sites
have been 'official' mirror sites for many years.
In the meantime, however, Apache group has grown to develop a lot of
things besides the httpd server ( XML, Jakarta etc ). Just because the
previously
'official' mirror sites failed to mirror these new projects shouldn't be a
reason to
'demote' them from their official status. There could be many reasons why they
are
not mirroring the new projects - lack of disk space, user interest etc.
Yes, if the facilities that they have permit, they should mirror the
whole thing
but, those that have supported the distribution of the Apache httpd for so
long, shouldn't
be punished for not being able to keep up with the rapid expansion of the
Apache group's
projects.
What is the opinion of others on this ?
--------------------------------------------------------
Devendra Narayan
Senior Engineer, Information Systems Division,
Science University of Tokyo.
"Sex is not the answer. Sex is the question. Yes is the answer."
---------------------------------------------------------
