On Mon, 2 Sep 2013, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2013 23:45:06 +0200
From: Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org>
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: Henk P. Penning <penn...@uu.nl>
Subject: Re: 4.0.1 release and distribution.
On 01/09/2013 Henk P. Penning wrote:
For 4.0.0 I added the binaries slowly ; some 4 to 5 languages
a day is what the rsync servers can handle. So, it takes 5 days
for the quick mirrors plus 2 days for the straglers. Note that
there are some sites that are still trying to catch up.
Soon after GA date (or earlier), refs to 4.0.0 sigs and sums should
point to 'archive.apache.org/' (instead of www.apache.org).
I would very much avoid introducing another bottleneck in the process. Voting
on the release already takes 3 days, and we won't start copying anything
before we have the final result, as we learned from 4.0. For 4.0, after the
release was approved, we managed to have it uploaded to the mirrors (the SF
mirrors) rather quickly, and at the same time the checksums/signatures, being
very small files, were quickly uploaded to dist. This may have taken 2 days,
but not more.
With this change we would have 3 days for voting plus 7 days for copying to
mirrors before we can announce. And the benefits would be very marginal: the
number of users who download from the Apache mirrors is negligible.
So, in short, if this can be done in a way that does not slow down the
post-approval upload period from 2 days to 7 days, fine; otherwise, it is
better to repeat what was done for 4.0: within 2 days binaries on SF and
checksums on dist or, even better, already on archive -which is automatically
populated from dist but has a 24-hour delay- so that we don't need to update
the links later; then, gradually, binaries uploaded to dist too (this time
the delay may be a matter of days instead of weeks).
Hi,
I don't think that the way 4.0.0 was released, should be used
as an example or even referred to as an acceptable scenario.
As I said, almost all mirrors will have everything afer 5 days ;
the 2 (7-5) extra days would give most slow mirrors a chance
to catch up too.
Having stuff on the mirrors is more important for remote areas
(far from .us and .eu) ; and "remote" often means "poor".
For 'remote' downloaders it is a real benefit if they can get
the distro from a local mirror. I think that should be taken
into consideration, even if the download-numbers are small.
In the scenario you suggest, by GA date, all mirrors will have
only half the stuff. That is messy. Extending the lead time from
2 to 5 days would give us the opportunity to do it (almost) right.
Andrea.
Regards,
Henk Penning
------------------------------------------------------------ _
Henk P. Penning, ICT-beta R Uithof BBL-761 _/ \_
Faculty of Science, Utrecht University T +31 30 253 4106 / \_/ \
Princetonplein 5, 3584CC Utrecht, NL F +31 30 253 4553 \_/ \_/
http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~penni101/ M penn...@uu.nl \_/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
