From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 403 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2004 05:17:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 32677 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2004 05:16:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail-out3.apple.com) (17.254.13.22) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 12 Nov 2004 05:16:52 -0000 Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (a17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225]) by mail-out3.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAC5MYRq018457 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:22:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from relay4.apple.com (relay4.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.3.14) with ESMTP id ; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:17:16 -0800 Received: from [17.219.197.37] ([17.219.197.37]) by relay4.apple.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAC5GiJD002205; Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:16:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4194473D.7060300@apple.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:28:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040910 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eric McDonald CC: xconq7 Subject: Re: New Home for Xconq Project? References: <4191777B.7060104@phy.cmich.edu> In-Reply-To: <4191777B.7060104@phy.cmich.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg01404.txt.bz2 Eric McDonald wrote: > Hello Xconquerors, > > 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. Many sites with that level of activity wish they only went down twice in a year! That said, sources.redhat.com has not developed into the visible site that many people originally imagined for it, and with the turnover of people I don't think there are any Xconqers left at Red Hat. So its retention is mostly out of inertia and maybe as a little bit of a personal favor; not very good protection against the next corporate shakeup. 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. 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. Stan