> -1 - maybe I don't have the right to speak up on CDN usage, but personally I > feel it's a bad idea to delegate overall PyPI availability exclusively to a > commercial third party.
Well, it's been done, and it was always a better idea than the way mirrors was implemented. > It's OK for me that we're using them to improve PyPI > availability, but completely putting our faith in their hands, doesn't sound > right to me. We must put out faith in somebody's hands with regards to PyPI. That hasn't changed. > That's something that the mirroring infrastructure should have been > constructed for. I completely agree that the way the mirroring was > established was way sub-optimal. I think we can do better. Only by building our own CDN. We won't do better than the ones that exist. > Well, now we have one breakage point more which keeps annoying me. We do? How? > Also, not everyone wants or needs auto-detection the way that the protocol > describes it. I personally just hand-pick a mirror (my own, hah) and keep > using that. I agree that this is probably the best choice, and you can still do that. > I'd like to avoid breakage. Again, if you don't let me choose where to spend > my time, I'd rather invest the time I need for cleaning up the breakage into > something constructive. The only breakage I can see in this proposal is that the [a-z] dns names go away. That would take four months. I think perhaps that's a bit short. I don't see why we can't keep them around for much longer. A way to find mirrors is needed, but perhaps not automatic, but for when pypi goes down. //Lennart _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig