With the amount of versioning going on, eventually a release falls into a state of non-usage, I suspect there should be room for such a mechanism, otherwise mirrors will become bloated with unused, outdated, antiquated and obsolete content.

I suspect some sort of "redirect" mechanism would be sufficient in cases where an unmirrored archive is used. Something that most web servers support (for instance Apache Httpd and .htaccess files)

Existing Example:

archives.apache.org represents content from www.apache.org/dist that has been "decommissioned" from the mirroring process, of course mirrors may maintain copies of these files by not deleting contents.

Ideally, such a mechanism could even be automated based on historical download information on the resource. I.E. if the resource hasn't been downloaded in 5 years, move it into an archive and provide a redirect or notice.


Nick Chalko wrote:
Patrick Chanezon wrote:

Did you specify a lifecycle for artifacts, with some durations, and a process to decommision them ?

Good question. This may be something to put to the board. My general thought are. "Released" version should live forever, unless a security or other fatal flaw is found in a release.

As a minimum I think the latest version of each point release should be kept ie 1.2.x.

-- Mark Diggory Software Developer Harvard MIT Data Center http://www.hmdc.harvard.edu

Reply via email to