On 2018-03-27 13:56, Mojca Miklavec wrote: > I don't know about the best way to do it, but I would like to suggest to > provide macports mirorring in two different sizes: a small one and a > complete one. > > While I'm a heavy supporter of providing support for legacy systems, I > see no reason to mirror files for them on all of our mirrors and cause > troubles to them. I would suggest to mirror by default just the latest > version of any given source and binary and only support the latest three > OSes there. Then we could have additional files to support older systems > on a smaller set of mirrors, just on those where it would not cause any > additional troubles to them. Since the number of users of legacy systems > is much smaller, this should not have a heavy impact on bandwidth to > that smaller number of mirrors either. > > I'm not saying this should be implemented immediately, but I would > certainly start thinking about that before we add additional four > mirrors (three legacy ones and 10.14).
It would probably help if we had a top-level directory for the macOS version. Mirroring a specific subset of the archives would then be trivial. I know it is nice to see all packages for a port in one place and it is easier to check what has already been built. But hopefully we would have this information on individual port index pages soon. Rainer