On 6 August 2013 17:59, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > It's probably simpler to just lengthen the timeframe and allow early opt > in to having the N.pypi.python.org redirected back to PyPI (Minor point, > it doesn't actually go directly through the CDN because the CDN is configured > to require SSL). > > I would much rather have the details laid out in the PEP than have the Infra > team being placed in the line of fire. I think it would even be reasonable to > not have a forced redirect to the CDN and instead say in N amount of time > the DNS entries will be removed, and allow mirror operators to ask us to > redirect their N.pypi.python.org back to the CDN if they've felt their > migration > is complete before N amount of time happens.
Sounds good to me. > The big question then becomes what is a reasonable value for N amount of time, > the original proposal essentially used 4 months for no real reason. Would 6 > months > be better? 8? I think making this window _too_ long doesn't really do anything > except delay the inevitable and the window should be decided on for what's a > reasonable > amount of time for people to move away from pointing directly at the > N.pypi.python.org > not delaying the need to do it until a later date. I believe Christian gets to define reasonable on this point :) Plucking a date out of the air, though, why not: July 1, 2014, with 6 month, 3 month and 1 month warnings sent to the operators of mirrors that haven't yet been redirected back to PyPI. That's nearly 11 months away, and hopefully other changes will have settled down by then. If the mirror operators are happy their transition is complete before then, cool, otherwise they have a hard deadline to work with. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia On 6 August 2013 17:59, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: > > On Aug 6, 2013, at 3:47 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 6 August 2013 17:30, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: >>> On Aug 6, 2013, at 3:20 AM, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote: >>>> See above. He did that, and the PyPI maintainers will break it. >>> >>> I don't think anyones claimed that removing the names won't break things for >>> people who directly referenced them, but it's an important step that we do >>> that. >> >> Right, but I think it's one where we can offer responsive mirror >> maintainers a generous time frame. We're down to only 5 mirrors using >> the *.pypi.python.org naming scheme anyway, so we should probably >> include contacting the maintainers directly in the transition plan. >> >> That makes the process: >> >> - we immediately stop handing out any new *.pypi.python.org mirror >> names (this has effectively happened already, the PEP will just be >> making it official) >> - the operators of the 5 current *.pypi.python.org mirrors are >> contacted directly, informing them of the plan to deprecate and remove >> those domain names, and offering the choice of two alternatives: > > Minor point but it's 4 mirrors. The a mirror is simply an alias for PyPI > itself > which leaves, c, e, f, g. > >> >> 1. After 2 months (or earlier if requested), the domain name is >> redirected to the PyPI CDN and the mirror is effectively retired. 2 >> months after the release of pip 1.5, the name is removed entirely >> 2. The mirror operator establishes a 301 redirect to a HTTPS >> capable domain name they control and negotiates the time frame for >> retirement and removal of the *.pypi.python.org domain record with the >> PSF infrastructure team >> >> - after two months, last.pypi.python.org and any *.pypi.python.org >> mirror names which didn't request option 2 above are redirected to the >> CDN >> - two months after the release of pip 1.5, last.pypi.python.org and >> any *.pypi.python.org mirror names which didn't request option 2 above >> are removed from the DNS >> - the exact time frames for option 2 above will be worked out >> individually with the mirror operators that request it (that would be >> at least Christian for f.pypi.python.org, and perhaps some of the >> other mirror operators if they also choose option 2) > > It's probably simpler to just lengthen the timeframe and allow early opt > in to having the N.pypi.python.org redirected back to PyPI (Minor point, > it doesn't actually go directly through the CDN because the CDN is configured > to require SSL). > > I would much rather have the details laid out in the PEP than have the Infra > team being placed in the line of fire. I think it would even be reasonable to > not have a forced redirect to the CDN and instead say in N amount of time > the DNS entries will be removed, and allow mirror operators to ask us to > redirect their N.pypi.python.org back to the CDN if they've felt their > migration > is complete before N amount of time happens. > > The big question then becomes what is a reasonable value for N amount of time, > the original proposal essentially used 4 months for no real reason. Would 6 > months > be better? 8? I think making this window _too_ long doesn't really do anything > except delay the inevitable and the window should be decided on for what's a > reasonable > amount of time for people to move away from pointing directly at the > N.pypi.python.org > not delaying the need to do it until a later date. > >> >> Cheers, >> Nick. >> >> -- >> Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia > > > ----------------- > Donald Stufft > PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA > -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
