-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
<snip>
I think "dissing" is a strong word. I am not dissing them, because they have helped a lot of substantial projects to get their feet off the ground, I bow in respect to them for doing so. I am merely stating concerns as I see them and they are for the lot technical issues.Personally I dislike the single location with sourceforge and the fact that you are somewhat bound to their limit system.Ah, that's what it boils down to (like with 99% of the people I met who diss SF.net) - personal dislike :-)
<snip>
We can, if we think it's useful, still have an own server, to host email addresses. Or other things, we have to... But right now, I am not willing to give up on SF.net that easily. I am very very happy with the services they have been and are still providing to us.I have no problem paying for a good course, I make enough money (that sounds silly). I also know, that we drive a lot of traffic and that would surely draw sponsors, I can think of 3 or 4 people who'd probably say yes right away.
A server we host on our own also means we have to maintain it on our own. Somebody has to pay the bandwidth, for example. You know what was the main reasons SF.net asked us to move the bindist from the webservers? No, not the disk space (a couple GB), it was the fact that we incurred multiple GB/day of load. So if we host our own bindist server, be prepared to pay for that.
One option I see, if it turns out that indeed our bindist can't be rsynced to external mirrors, though: we could setup our own server to host a master copy of the bindist; we'd still rsync it to the SF.net servers, and mirrors could use it, but we'd try to restrict access to it otherwise (e.g. by letting the apt config files point to the SF.net mirrors by default, as before).
I am looking into it
The "many" I meant are those 50 or 60 very good friends I have. I should have written "many I met".
Yes it is a personal issue, and I wonder on what you base your claim that " many are a bit hesitant with sourceforge". I have only encountered a handful of people for whom it was true, in all cases when pressed it boiled down to personal dislike.
<snip>Not at all. Take the university of Vienna. They have a policy which says that they will follow any distribution or software project as long as it is being maintained regardless of size growth or popularity. They also state, that due to the current nature of their service not new mirrors are accepted that have a size of more than 1.5 Gig.
Ah come one, that argument is a bit nonsense. That doesn't make such a big difference, if they are concerned about the bandwidth used to create the mirror, they can easily spread out the mirror process to last several days/weeks/months.
I agree it won't hurt us to get mirrors, but it's not as pressing ultimate important, in my eyes.
I can tell you about other institutions that have a similar policy.
It is not ultimate though, I agree. - -d -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQE94kpWiW/Ta/pxHPQRAxxPAJ48KKkb/aa2fIZI7N0PU8OayZF3cQCgx/F+ iGyhygejxgrGnYsVc4gBmto= =tQwT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
