On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:16:46AM +0000, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 14/06/2011 10:26, Tony Stevenson wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 09:21:48AM +0000, Hyrum K Wright wrote: > >>> We have asked them to use a different mirror, but several of them (in > >>> my own testing) appear to have the same problem. For a user > >>> attempting to get source code, it can be a frustrating experience, > >>> which ultimately leads to admit defeat and walk away. > >> > >> If you fancy patching the cgi, I dont see that it is impossible to do that. > > > > No patch required. Only listing mirrors updated since a given timestamp > > is already supported. See the bottom of this page: > > http://www.apache.org/dev/mirrors.html > > Yes, it is supported, but recommended against, to avoid flooding the > up-to-date mirrors. > > In IRC, Gavin noted that the list will only includes mirrors sync'd in > the last 24 hours. This information is self-reported, and the issue > is that mirrors reporting themselves as up-to-date aren't really so > (they lack the subversion directory).
This is due to the mechanism that is used to check the mirror is upto-date. We check $mirror/DATE this is a file maintained via rsync. However, it is not impossible for someone to modify their rsync job to not include a given path, such as subversion in this case. Just report them via JIRA, and we will deal with it. > > The artifacts in question were added to www.apache.org/dist 5 days ago. > > -Hyrum > -- Cheers, Tony --------------------------------------- Tony Stevenson t...@pc-tony.com // pct...@apache.org t...@caret.cam.ac.uk http://blog.pc-tony.com GPG - 1024D/51047D66 --------------------------------------"
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
