Re: New Home for Xconq Project?

["D. Cooper Stevenson" <cstevens@gencom.us>]

What would happen if we went to SourceForge or Savannah for "eyballs" and 
pointed to the Xconq.org or RedHat site for a CVS backup?

It's trivial for me to mirror the xconq.org server with the source 
repository's server.

Obviously, this isn't an "automatic failover" solution but would it provide a 
good compromise?


-Coop

On Friday 12 November 2004 17:28, Eric McDonald wrote:
> Hi Stan,
>
> Thanks for weighing in.
>
> On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Stan Shebs wrote:
> > >   Over the past few months I have had some discussions with various
> > > people about whether the Xconq project should be moved to a new host.
> >
> > It's certainly worth a serious look. The main advantage of the RH
> > sources site is that it's managed by professionals who immediately
> > have people all over them if things stop working; it's the same
> > machine as hosts GCC, and you can imagine the urgency when the GCC
> > sources are no longer available.
>
> I seem to recall that one of the outages was for more than 10
> hours. Presumably this was hardware-related, but it raises
> questions about clustering, redundancy, and whatnot....
>
> >Many sites with that level of
> > activity wish they only went down twice in a year!
>
> This is true.
>
> > I'm not really up-to-date on the alternate hosting options though.
> > Sourceforge was pretty abysmal when I tried to check out a project
> > some months ago; most cvs updates simply failed to complete and timed
> > out.
>
> Good to note.
>
> >Savannah used to have a problem with its admins disappearing
> > without telling anybody, dunno if that's gotten better. They also
> > tend to be more ideological about freeness, although I don't think
> > that's an issue for any part of Xconq.
>
> Yeah. They also had a significant security breach back near the
> end of last year, IIRC. The only reason why I might favor them is
> that their set of tools is more familiar to me. Sourceforge (which
> I investigated a few nights ago) does things differently (which
> does not imply that their way is inferior): their trackers and
> file release system, to name a couple of examples.
>
> However, Sourceforge is at least an order of magnitude larger
> than Savannah, I think.
>
> I will see about putting my development branch of the Xconq
> sources on Sourceforge in the way of making a trial of it. If
> things go well, then we could move the Xconq mainline branch
> there at a later point, if we wanted to.
>
>   Thanks,
>     Eric