On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 11:11 -0700, Joe Schaefer wrote: > FTR, I just got thru discussing these issues with > Henk Penning, our Apache mirror guy. While he's > tried to reach out to Peter without success recently, > he'd like to get in contact with whoever currently > is managing the mirrorbrain mirrors because those > mirror operators are in the dark about what our plans > are, and maintaining good relations with mirror operators > is essential for all concerned. Please provide me > with a list of mirror network managers for the old > system so I can pass it along to Henk for followup.
Hi, I have the list of addresses, culled from the website, which I used for the initial mailing - in a spreadsheet, with notes as to which addresses bounced and which responded. Will email that directly to you and CC Henk. //drew > > > Infra's position is currently that, for the upcoming > release ONLY, continuing to use the legacy mirrorbrain > system in conjunction with ASF mirrors and SF downloads > is A-OK. However it is painfully obvious that maintaining > two different mirror networks causes trouble for everyone, > so we will ask that this PPMC take steps to phase out > the mirrorbrain network for all subsequent releases, leaving > just ASF mirrors and SF downloads. At that point we will > be better positioned to avoid duplication of download > resources and hopefully have incorporated many of the old > mirrors into the ASF mirror network. > > > Note: while you are required to use ASF mirrors, your use > of SF download services is contingent on satisfactory performance > and whatever criterion you consider essential- IOW its up to you > whether you want to keep using it or not. All SF has asked of > us is timely notification so they can cancel whatever supporting > arrangements they have made to not incur needless costs, something > I consider eminently fair and reasonable. > > > HTH > > > > >________________________________ > > From: Rob Weir <[email protected]> > >To: [email protected] > >Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 1:20 PM > >Subject: Re: Ditching our mirror system for an inferior solution? > > > >On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:58 PM, drew <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 14:42 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > >>> On 13 April 2012 14:00, drew <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 05:38 -0700, Joe Schaefer wrote: > >>> >> Bit late to pretend you're trying to be helpful > >>> >> here with the bits about NIH you like tossing around. > >>> >> > >>> >> What questions are you asking again? And what facts > >>> >> are you pointing out? Seems to me we had a working > >>> >> agreementabout a month or so, settled entirely on-list, > >>> >> but yesterday Peter pitches a fit and you decide NOW > >>> >> is the time for complaints? Gee if that's not kicking > >>> >> sand in the faces of the people who worked out this > >>> >> deal you'll have to excuse me while I figure out where > >>> >> else all this unwanted sand could've come from. > >>> > > >>> > From my recollection the discussion earlier always started from the > >>> > premise that Apache mirrors would take over, I thought because that was > >>> > the policy, only apache mirrors. > >>> > >>> Apache mirrors are ones sanctioned and coordinated by the ASF infra > >>> team. They are not ones that the ASF manage. SF are working directly > >>> with ASF Infra so that they become an official ASF mirror, the fact > >>> that they are providing much more than a single mirror site changes > >>> nothing. > >>> > >>> Any organisation whether they were part of the previous mirrorbrain > >>> service or not is free to work with ASF Infra to become a part of the > >>> ASF mirror system. > >>> > >>> > I asked when (how) it was determined that the Mirrorbrain service was > >>> > broken and had to be replaced? > >>> > >>> Nobody said it was broken. What was said is that ASF Infra are not > >>> willing or able to support two distinct mirror systems so either > >>> people step up and move (and support) mirrorbrain at the ASF or the > >>> ASF Infra team step up and make it work. ASF Infra is making it work, > >>> using the resources being offered, including those from SF. Actions > >>> speak louder than words. > >>> > >>> I'm sure ASF Infra will continue accept offers of long term support > >>> and assistance from any third party willing and able. > >>> > >>> > I pointed out that it had never stopped serving up files, that TTBOMK > >>> > the mirror operators had never notified this project that they would no > >>> > longer work with the project. > >>> > >>> True, and the ASF Infra team asked the PPMC to reach our to those > >>> operators and ask them if they wanted to continue as part of the ASF > >>> mirror system. Infra are not dumping the old network, they are > >>> augmenting it with the existing ASF mirror and newcomers. Things look > >>> different when you look from a different angle. > >>> > >> Hi Ross > >> > >> Alright, so it is just a matter of existing policy, which is to say that > >> as part of matriculation into Apache the project relinquishes control of > >> the distribution process from the project proper to the foundation, > >> specifically the Infrastructure team, no exceptions. > >> > >> In the case of the existing mirrorbrain network then individual mirrors > >> must conform to the existing requirements for becoming an official > >> Apache mirror. > >> > >> In this case then the fact that the individual mirrorbrain server > >> operators have not said they would stop supporting the project is of no > >> consideration, rather what was needed, or lacking, is an active > >> declaration of support via execution of the required steps needed to be > >> recognized as official Apache mirrors, unless as is the case for some > >> they already are such. > >> > >> Which is where I get a bit confused as to the reality of the situation > >> on the ground, at this moment. > >> > >> When it is said that the mirrorbrain network will also be used for > >> distribution what is meant is those servers in the current network which > >> have become, or were already, Apache mirrors, but not the full > >> contingent of servers? I believe that is accurate, but as I say I'm not > >> really positive this is the case. > >> > >> So the facts on the ground are, that there has not been a large number > >> of mirrorbrain operators executing these steps and therefore the project > >> is faced with the necessity of augmenting the system by including the SF > >> services. > >> > >> As to Peter then, it is in no way impugning the quality of all the hard > >> work that he and others have contributed over the years, or the ability > >> to continue to deliver the 'goods' (even patches), it is simply a > >> consequence of the move to Apache and pre-existing foundation policy. > >> > >> It is just an unfortunate consequence that in this specific case one of > >> the better executed, and well functioning, aspects of the community > >> efforts from the old project falls afoul of the requirements in the > >> projects in it's new home. > >> > > > > > >Drew, consider our recent OOo track record of community-supported > >infrastructure: > > > >1) Extensions and Templates? It gradually fell apart, over a period > >of months, a horrible user experience, embarrassing, with zero > >volunteers from the community able or willing to fix it, before > >SourgeForge volunteered to host it. (Apache Infra also volunteered to > >help, and certainly could have done it as well. Point is, the AOO PMC > >failed to solve this problem) > > > >2) phpBB Forums? No admin, no maintenance. It is one critical bug > >away from falling over, or one XSS away from being shut down. > > > >3) Pootle? No one in the project ever stepped forward to set this up. > >We were fortunate that Apache Infra eventually did this and saved our > >asses. > > > >So we're not exactly showing our strength when we talk about the > >community's ability to maintain complex infrastructure. Maybe these > >all worked before. Maybe there was some Sun/Oracle staff helping? I > >don't know. > > > >In any case, I don't think, given this recent track record, it is very > >wise to put all of our eggs in one basket and rely entirely on > >MirrorBrain for our downloads. Some diversity and redundancy is a good > >thing, both for peak demand, as well as insurance against the same > >things happening to our downloads as happened to Extensions, Templates > >and forums. > > > >-Rob > > > >> //drew > >> > > > > > >
