From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25217 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2004 17:28:47 -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 25185 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2004 17:28:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ob2.cmich.edu) (141.209.20.21) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 12 Nov 2004 17:28:40 -0000 Received: from egate1.central.cmich.local ([141.209.15.85]) by ob2.cmich.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iACHKN0h001912; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:20:24 -0500 Received: from leon.phy.cmich.edu ([141.209.165.20]) by egate1.central.cmich.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:28:35 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by leon.phy.cmich.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6FF970037; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:28:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:37:00 -0000 From: Eric McDonald To: Stan Shebs Cc: xconq7 Subject: Re: New Home for Xconq Project? In-Reply-To: <4194473D.7060300@apple.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Nov 2004 17:28:35.0257 (UTC) FILETIME=[09E55A90:01C4C8DD] X-CanItPRO-Stream: default X-Spam-Score: -0.9 () X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . canit . ca) X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg01405.txt.bz2 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