Thanks for the clarification Robert. I'm glad we didn't mess something
up. :-)
I'll definitely keep an eye on the various threads for information about
the changes. It all sounds very good to me. :-)
Dan
On Sunday 06 May 2007 06:55, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 5/3/07, Daniel Kulp
From what I overheard, the old place is as bad as the new place. And
What I meant was: at *this time*. The new place is much better when
everything is set up.
Martijn
--
Learn Wicket at ApacheCon Europe: http://apachecon.com
Join the wicket community at irc.freenode.net: ##wicket
Wicket 1.2.6
On 5/6/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i'd rather have CXF and wicket in the old places and have the time to
do this properly than delay the releases or rush the move
And this is why we put the release in the old place. We want to keep
our project going whilst still working
On 5/3/07, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/2/07, Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Do other projects have a good way to track this? I know we could pull
> > the logs for the p.a.o webserver and grep through them looking for
> > things, but I'm wondering if there's somethi
On 5/3/07, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Noel,
On Thursday 03 May 2007 03:59, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Except you forget one detail: incubator artifacts don't go to the
> > mirror system.
>
> And that's changing/changed.
Can I ask when?The vote that was called in mid march [1] n
FYI, Vadim is already providing stats on some (non incubating) projects:
http://people.apache.org/~vgritsenko/stats/projects/index.html
I don't know if it's easy for him to add incubating projects, and how
he deals with mirrors. In a sense even if the download counter is not
accurate, I agree wit
Unless they don't download it via your link, or they download more
than once (getting copies on multiple machines?), or any number of
other things that can throw your numbers off. It's a losing battle
for statistics that IMO aren't very useful anyway. All download
counts are good for is ego stro
On 5/5/07, Marshall Schor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One confusion I have: If we count "clicks" on the download link, it
seems that even if that link led to a "mirror" page, it would count
pretty accurately (except of course if a person clicked to download, and
then didn't bother going through w
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Garrett Rooney wrote:
The mirror system makes this an essentially unsolvable problem.
And in addition to all of your other valid points, there is the problem of
having a a farm of caching proxies on the ISP side of the net, leading to
the seemingly odd case that
On 5/2/07, Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do other projects have a good way to track this? I know we could pull
> the logs for the p.a.o webserver and grep through them looking for
> things, but I'm wondering if there's something we can put on our
> download page that users would cl
Noel,
On Thursday 03 May 2007 03:59, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Except you forget one detail: incubator artifacts don't go to the
> > mirror system.
>
> And that's changing/changed.
Can I ask when?The vote that was called in mid march [1] never had
a "result" posted. The discussion [2] th
> Except you forget one detail: incubator artifacts don't go to the mirror
> system.
And that's changing/changed.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks Dan, indeed, as Tuscany is still under incubation, mirrors and other
things won't apply.
Did anybody ever created a script to parse the logs and provide totals ?
On 5/2/07, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wednesday 02 May 2007 18:43, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> The mirror system ma
On Wednesday 02 May 2007 18:43, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> The mirror system makes this an essentially unsolvable problem. Not
> to mention the fact that you have no clue if people are actually
> getting the code from one of our mirrors at all, they could get it
> from a linux distribution, or any nu
Garrett Rooney wrote:
> The mirror system makes this an essentially unsolvable problem.
And in addition to all of your other valid points, there is the problem of
having a a farm of caching proxies on the ISP side of the net, leading to
the seemingly odd case that the more popular a download, the
On 5/2/07, Marshall Schor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We're curious to see how many downloads we're getting, perhaps sorted by
ip number or who's downloading (I realize that would need be
"volunteered" information).
Do other projects have a good way to track this? I know we could pull
the logs for
Yes, I'd be interested in this information for the Apache Tuscany downloads
as well...
On 5/2/07, Marshall Schor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We're curious to see how many downloads we're getting, perhaps sorted by
ip number or who's downloading (I realize that would need be
"volunteered" informa
17 matches
Mail list logo
