Just a note here: I haven't added support for the legacy indexes for in Gemcutter. Since you need at least RubyGems 1.3.3 to use the gem plugins, I figured supporting the legacy ones shouldn't be a priority as the project started. Currently I'm only generating and serving up the modern indexes (and these are undergoing some serious refactoring and rework internally as well).
It would be interesting to watch the traffic of the legacy indexes vs the modern indexes to see if it's even worth it to support those going forward. At the very least, we could drop the legacy indexes into S3 and not update them. -Nick On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Tom Copeland <t...@infoether.com> wrote: > > On Aug 26, 2009, at 11:12 PM, Tom Copeland wrote: > > >> On Aug 26, 2009, at 10:27 PM, Nick Quaranto wrote: >> >> So I'm trying out: http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html >>> >>> 14mb/day, is less than 1GB a month. For S3 that's less than $1/month just >>> for data transfer out, and a little more with CloudFront. It doesn't seem >>> like this would be a problem unless if we were in the range of >>> terabytes/month. As for hosting files on Gemcutter, I'm open to that if >>> that's what is necessary for the transition. 80 mb/day is still a trivial >>> amount for S3 or CloudFront to host, cost-wise. >>> >> > Oh, one more thing - serving up the gem indexes (yaml, Marshal.4.8, > Marshal.4.8.Z, etc) also accounts for 100 MB or so a day. The yaml file is > about 60MB of that. Anyhow, it's still a pretty small amount S3-wise... > > > Yours, > > tom > > _______________________________________________ > Rubygems-developers mailing list > http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems > Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers > _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
