On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 06:20:23PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I don't really understand that point though, since the plan is to drop > > mirror > > support for all minor arches, what does it cost to have a 3 level archive > > support : > > > > 1) tier 1 arches, fully mirrored and released. > > One full set of sources, 10G. > > > 2) tier 2 arches, mostly those that we are dropping, maybe mirrored from > > scc.debian.org in a secondary mirror network. (why not ftp.debian.org/scc > > though ?). > > Second set of identical sources, +10G == 20G. > > > 3) tier 3 arches, or in development arches, available on > > ftp.debian.org/in-devel or something. > > Third set of identical sources, +10G == 30G.
Ah, no, nothing is stopping us from keeping the pool architecture for this, just having different views of the stuff for different mirror networks to work on. > Only if all 3 are on the same server can the sources be hardlinked and > getting those hardlinks preserved to mirrors is tricky. Well, it just calls for smarther mirroring tricks. Also, i do believe that not all mirrors carry experimental for example, and said packages are in the pool all the same, or whatever. > > I don't see how having the in-devel arches be hosted on alioth > > instead on the official debian ftp server would cause a problem. > > > > Also, i don't understand why scc.debian.org is better than > > ftp.debian.org/scc, > > really, ideally we could have /debian, /debian-scc, and /debian-devel or > > something such. Is it really a physical problem fro ftp-master to held all > > these roles ? What is it exactly that ftp-masters want to drop all these > > arches for ? > > > > Mirrors could then chose to go with 1) only (most of them will), or also > > mirror 2) and/or 3). > > Why not just /debian as we have now. That means all sources are in > debian/pool/ just once. And mirrors can choose to exclude archs from > the mirrors as many (non primary) mirrors already do. The know-how for > partial mirrors is there and nothing needs to be invented for it. Yeah, that would be easiest, i was speaking about a logical separation of the arches, not a physical one. > I fail to see why the mirror situation should have an (changing) > impact on the archive layout and I fail to see how splitting the > archive, and thereby duplicating sources, helps mirrors that want > more than just i386/ppc/amd64. Thanks for your input Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]