Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 17:07 -0700, Wolfgang Bornath wrote: 2010/10/22 Olivier Thauvin nanar...@nanardon.zarb.org: In fact we have no way to deny to someone to do a partial mirror. The question is from our point of view, do we encourage people to create non testable mirror or untrusted mirror (not update enough to ensure last security update get sync). Besides that people can put up mirrors in any way they want and use them in any way they want. They are just not listed as official mirrors of Mageia. Everybody was happy, the maintainers of the list, me, and all people who used my mirror (it was not crowded, even at release time). A solution suitable for everybody. So should we have an 'Official mirror list' and an 'Unofficial mirror list'? Because a mirror that is not listed at all, is rather hard to find.
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
On 22 October 2010 08:11, herman her...@aeronetworks.ca wrote: On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 17:07 -0700, Wolfgang Bornath wrote: 2010/10/22 Olivier Thauvin nanar...@nanardon.zarb.org: In fact we have no way to deny to someone to do a partial mirror. The question is from our point of view, do we encourage people to create non testable mirror or untrusted mirror (not update enough to ensure last security update get sync). Besides that people can put up mirrors in any way they want and use them in any way they want. They are just not listed as official mirrors of Mageia. Everybody was happy, the maintainers of the list, me, and all people who used my mirror (it was not crowded, even at release time). A solution suitable for everybody. So should we have an 'Official mirror list' and an 'Unofficial mirror list'? Because a mirror that is not listed at all, is rather hard to find. I think wobo meant local mirrors, e.g. the mandrivauser.de mirror was mainly used by German users who found out about it from mandrivauser.de forums. (and having a list of unofficial mirrors will be a pain, how would one differentiate unofficial mirrors that just don't mirror some sub-trees, e.g. debug, and unofficial mirrors that are just plain old/don't-get-synced-regularly). -- Ahmad Samir
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
Le vendredi 22 octobre 2010 à 00:26 +0200, J.A. Magallón a écrit : On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:16:06 +0100, Buchan Milne bgmi...@multilinks.com wrote: On Thursday, 21 October 2010 06:37:37 Olivier Thauvin wrote: * J.A. Magallón (jamagal...@ono.com) wrote: On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 18:34:24 +0200, Olivier Thauvin ... - could be the arch names more uniform ? in my personal scripts/setups I use x86-32 and x86-64. Is x86-32 a valid architecture for rpm etc.? While uniformity might be nice, unfortunately vendors don't necessarily choose uniform architecure names, and it might be better to match the repo structure to values that can be determined directly (and not heuristcally) . I've also never seen 'uname -m' report x86-32 or x86_32. Moreover, perhaps in a not so near future some adventurous soul builds Mageia on ARM or Sparc, so why not sort things like distrib/cauldron/srpm distrib/cauldron/x86/32/iso /rpm /64 /arm/32 /64 I don't know if memory address space is a useful differentiator here, as features differ substantially in different ARM cores of the same family or architecture version. E.g., Fedora has an 'armv5tel' architecture, N900 ships .deb's with 'armel' as the architecture. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture /sparc/32 /64 AFAIK, the valid architecture names for sparc are sparc,sparc64,sparcv9. I was just thinking of people navigating the tree structure looking for what to download and install. Directory names have not to be the same as RPMs architecture, isn't it ? And is more neutral, you can decide you build the distro for Pentium3 at least and dont have to change the folder names... ;) This will have a impact on the usability of the $ARCH keyword in url for urpmi. Ie, the name must be derived from what we use for name of arch in rpm, given the way this feature was coded. Which in turn is arbitrary, iirc, but we may need to keep compatibility with previous mandriva version, as we plan to offer a upgrade path. -- Michael Scherer
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:55:32PM +0200, Renaud MICHEL wrote: On jeudi 21 octobre 2010 at 21:36, Remy CLOUARD wrote : On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:44:16AM +0200, Olivier Thauvin wrote: I don't know any process to deny someone to push hdlists and rpms. However I don't think it is a good idea to use this space as an alternative to oficial mageia. The risk is to confuse people. Well, I don’t think it’s about confusing people, after all these packages are in a different subtree than regular packages, rather giving choice. I know at least one person who said on #mageia-de that mageia would be a no-go for him if he couldn’t have awesome. awesome is already in mandriva, why wouldn't it be in mageia? If there is someone willing to package it, he may as well do it in the core repository (be it main or contrib, or whatever they will be called). This is off-topic, I was just taking awesome as an example. Awesome in current Mandriva is outdated (v2.3.6) whereas 3.4.8 was released. It’s just like comparing kde3 or kde4. Regards, -- Rémy CLOUARD () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments pgpt3nHbQkD0b.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 18:34, Olivier Thauvin nanar...@nanardon.zarb.org wrote: Now come the question: what is a valid mirror ?, eg, what a mirror should have as file to be valid ? Not sure if we discussed in depth MirrorBrain (http://www.mirrorbrain.org/ ) for managing mirrors index and redirections. If we were going to use it, could we, for instance, leave mirrors some liberty to mirror what branch they want (with some guidances and preferences of course) and let our MirrorBrain instance check and build the list of valid mirrors for the file actually requested? This, provided that _consistent_ branches of the tree are mirrored, and not only a file here, a file there. On one hand, this would introduce at least to other things to check: - having enough distributed mirrors that map the whole tree; - having download/install tools take this into account. On the other hand, this could allow more mirrors to take part in this, in that it may require less storage space and less bandwidth usage. It's not the only reason to use MirrorBrain anyway, but I wondered if this could be a complementary reason. Not sure, insights welcome. Cheers, Romain
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:44:16AM +0200, Olivier Thauvin wrote: * Remy CLOUARD (shikam...@mandriva.org) wrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 06:34:24PM +0200, Olivier Thauvin wrote: Hi, The peoples/ directory is dedicated to contributors and must allow anyone to share files related to the distribution (testing rpms, preworks) in an unofficial ways. How this can be setup in practice still have to be discuss. Hi, I would like to ask some details about this: As some of you might know, I’m using awesome for a window manager and have been providing RPMS for quite some time for it on my website. May I use the peoples repository to provide it as well as a customized cairo (with xcb enabled) ? As a mirror manager I say yes: I'll discuss with sys-admin team about how we can setup this, with a per user disk space limit (to avoid issue). From a project point of view it is veey different. The mirror tree is what some people will see about Mageia and I do think: - people content must be related to mageia Well, RPMS compiled for mageia are by definition related to mageia :-) - everything that can be included in the distrib must provide as RPMs using BS Well this would allow the chroot to fetch packages from these alternatives repositories and could automate the process. - people content must respect our policies. In a nutshell: this must be discuss. Having a people is at time just an idea, but it solve a need I had in mandriva to provide some rpms for testing purpose. Will users be able to add this as another repository ? I don't know any process to deny someone to push hdlists and rpms. However I don't think it is a good idea to use this space as an alternative to oficial mageia. The risk is to confuse people. Well, I don’t think it’s about confusing people, after all these packages are in a different subtree than regular packages, rather giving choice. I know at least one person who said on #mageia-de that mageia would be a no-go for him if he couldn’t have awesome. In Gentoo you have the ability to define your own USE flags to tweak your system to your needs. Here’s what it says when you activate the xcb flag and emerge cairo: WARN: postinst You have enabled the Cairo XCB backend which is used only by a select few apps. The Cairo XCB backend is presently un-maintained and needs a lot of work to get it caught up to the Xrender and Xlib backends, which are the backends used by most applications. See: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2008-December/004139.html I thought about using a README.urpmi to show in the %post section in a similar way. Of course we’re not gentoo and as we provide precompiled packages it doesn’t allow us to do things in a similar way (though we could provide some mechanisms like AUR for arch). The whole idea is that some people won’t feel “ghettoized” because they use something different than KDE or GNOME, though the concept can be extended to anything and not just window managers/desktop environments. Also, I'd like to notice this space is not a way to provide your own project, there is platform for that (sourceforge, zarb, gnu, etc...) Don’t get me wrong here, I was not talking about hosting a project, just packages for mageia. Regards, -- Rémy CLOUARD () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments pgpkA37F3TE4n.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
* Maarten Vanraes (maarten.vanr...@gmail.com) wrote: Op woensdag 20 oktober 2010 18:34:24 schreef Olivier Thauvin: Hi, You can find here: http://distrib-coffee.ipsl.jussieu.fr/pub/linux/Mageia/ the current mirror tree proposal. We now have to discuss it, I think. i didn't follow the whole previous discussion about the mirror tree, but would it be advisable to have a noarch subdir, next to i586 and x86_64 ? This is not on my side. The internal distribution tree structure is more related to build system than the global mirror tree structure. At least, the tree I am suggesting neither deny it, neither make it easier. Regards. -- Olivier Thauvin CNRS - LATMOS ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖ pgp0edinOgwxz.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
* Samuel Verschelde (sto...@laposte.net) wrote: Le jeudi 21 octobre 2010 00:44:16, Olivier Thauvin a écrit : In a nutshell: this must be discuss. Having a people is at time just an idea, but it solve a need I had in mandriva to provide some rpms for testing purpose. I don't understand very well what kind of packages would go into people rather than in dedicated testing media. What would be the difference ? I can give the example I had on Mandriva: I did some work on 'rpm' package itself, but since breaking this pakage would have lock the whole Bs I'd prefer to first have it tested by some people. This directory is in this case the perfect place. At this time, testing media did not exists thought. Another example could be the XFCE live Cd done by some people in past, hosted on distrib-coffee as mandriva where not able to push it on thier mirror (this issue get solved latelly). Pushing something on the mageia Mirror need some control. The people place give the opportunity to contributors to distribute somethings w/o needing super user privileges, but with a clear unofficial state. I am pretty sure some people will find usage to it. Regards Samuel Verschelde -- Olivier Thauvin CNRS - LATMOS ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖ pgpM15teuq82x.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
* Olivier Blin (mag...@blino.org) wrote: Olivier Thauvin nanar...@nanardon.zarb.org writes: I've seen that the distribs directory has sub-directory called stable1 and cauldron, will this sub-directory will be present in iso/ too ? As soon stable1 means our first distrib yes, but I don't think cauldron will be needed under iso/. It could be if we build snapshots of the dev distro automatically In this case, yes of course. I don't think does not mean it's a reality for ever ;) It's just my current feeling according information I have ;) -- Olivier Blin - blino -- Olivier Thauvin CNRS - LATMOS ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖ pgpHbBEBO83z2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
On jeudi 21 octobre 2010 at 21:36, Remy CLOUARD wrote : On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:44:16AM +0200, Olivier Thauvin wrote: I don't know any process to deny someone to push hdlists and rpms. However I don't think it is a good idea to use this space as an alternative to oficial mageia. The risk is to confuse people. Well, I don’t think it’s about confusing people, after all these packages are in a different subtree than regular packages, rather giving choice. I know at least one person who said on #mageia-de that mageia would be a no-go for him if he couldn’t have awesome. awesome is already in mandriva, why wouldn't it be in mageia? If there is someone willing to package it, he may as well do it in the core repository (be it main or contrib, or whatever they will be called). -- Renaud Michel
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
Le mercredi 20 octobre 2010 à 18:34 +0200, Olivier Thauvin a écrit : Hi, You can find here: http://distrib-coffee.ipsl.jussieu.fr/pub/linux/Mageia/ the current mirror tree proposal. We now have to discuss it, I think. Here notes: The 'mageia_timestamp' is a file updated on the main server every 5 minutes. It allow to check is a mirror synced or not Comparing to mandriva there is no more split between devel/stable, all distributions goes into distribs/ and all isos file into iso/. The updates/ tree disapear, avoiding some possible dependencies issues in updates rpms. The peoples/ directory is dedicated to contributors and must allow anyone to share files related to the distribution (testing rpms, preworks) in an unofficial ways. How this can be setup in practice still have to be discuss. Like quota, etc ? Finally the software/ directory should allow you to distribute the tarball (not rpm) for software we do. As soon we do free software people must be able to distribute our code in the same way any projects does. Replies like svn is readable or we have rpm is not appropriated. Now come the question: what is a valid mirror ?, eg, what a mirror should have as file to be valid ? I suggest to not give the choice and avoid mistake by saying except peoples a mirror must respect the whole tree to be valid. I would also exclude software/ from regular mirror, because this may not requires as much redundancy than regular mirror ( ie, I doubt many people will download tarball on a regular basis, and most softwre project are fine with 2 or 3 mirror ). On the other hand, it may not add much overhead to mirrors anyway. Something I would like to add is database dumps ( cleaned from password and private information, of course ), and maybe svn backup, stuff like that. So people who wish to fork our project will not have the same problem as we did. One of the issue we currently have is the fact we couldn't fork Mandriva wiki, because we didn't have access to the server. The same goes for several components ( ideas, maintainers database, full bugzilla dump, etc ). One of my goal would be to have a forkable infrastructure, so people can replicate ours ( using puppet/cfengine, as we plan to use ). ( replicate to study, replicate it to play with it, replicate to enhance it if needed ) And this would also provides use with a linus t backup system :p This mean everything must exists with this structure under the top level path. This way may avoid issues like mandriva on ibiblio (only 2005 and 2007.1 seems to exists...) ftp://ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/mandriva/Mandrivalinux/ I would let people choose what they mirror based on version. Ie, someone could mirror the last version only, the 3 last, etc, etc. This will likely provides enough flexibility without sacrifing too much the simplicity. -- Michael Scherer
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
* Michael Scherer (m...@zarb.org) wrote: Le mercredi 20 octobre 2010 à 18:34 +0200, Olivier Thauvin a écrit : Hi, You can find here: http://distrib-coffee.ipsl.jussieu.fr/pub/linux/Mageia/ the current mirror tree proposal. We now have to discuss it, I think. The peoples/ directory is dedicated to contributors and must allow anyone to share files related to the distribution (testing rpms, preworks) in an unofficial ways. How this can be setup in practice still have to be discuss. Like quota, etc ? Yes. Finally the software/ directory should allow you to distribute the tarball (not rpm) for software we do. As soon we do free software people must be able to distribute our code in the same way any projects does. Replies like svn is readable or we have rpm is not appropriated. Now come the question: what is a valid mirror ?, eg, what a mirror should have as file to be valid ? I suggest to not give the choice and avoid mistake by saying except peoples a mirror must respect the whole tree to be valid. I would also exclude software/ from regular mirror, because this may not requires as much redundancy than regular mirror ( ie, I doubt many people will download tarball on a regular basis, and most softwre project are fine with 2 or 3 mirror ). On the other hand, it may not add much overhead to mirrors anyway. I like the idea to centralize everything from external point of view: eg if you find a mageia mirror, you have everything. Something I would like to add is database dumps ( cleaned from password and private information, of course ), and maybe svn backup, stuff like that. So people who wish to fork our project will not have the same problem as we did. I was thinking to push svn on mirror. As potential problem, all these backup can add a lot of work and bandwidth on mirrors. I am not against, I am in favor of this, but just listing issues we can encoutered. And this would also provides use with a linus t backup system :p BTW: the misc-backup.rpm is taking a lot of place :)= This mean everything must exists with this structure under the top level path. This way may avoid issues like mandriva on ibiblio (only 2005 and 2007.1 seems to exists...) ftp://ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/mandriva/Mandrivalinux/ I would let people choose what they mirror based on version. Ie, someone could mirror the last version only, the 3 last, etc, etc. This will likely provides enough flexibility without sacrifing too much the simplicity. In fact we have no way to deny to someone to do a partial mirror. The question is from our point of view, do we encourage people to create non testable mirror or untrusted mirror (not update enough to ensure last security update get sync). It also make difficult the listing (eg having a gazillon of url for each distrib, which is the current problem of easyurpmi). -- Olivier Thauvin CNRS - LATMOS ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖ pgptakxeoSUkW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
2010/10/22 Olivier Thauvin nanar...@nanardon.zarb.org: In fact we have no way to deny to someone to do a partial mirror. The question is from our point of view, do we encourage people to create non testable mirror or untrusted mirror (not update enough to ensure last security update get sync). It also make difficult the listing (eg having a gazillon of url for each distrib, which is the current problem of easyurpmi). I think this is an easy one. Do it like it was done at Mandriva. Define what a valid mirror is, then list only valid mirrors. Besides that people can put up mirrors in any way they want and use them in any way they want. They are just not listed as official mirrors of Mageia. Same happened with our Mandriva mirror. I wouldn't mirror the /debug branches, so I was told that my mirror was not official and it was taken from the list. Everybody was happy, the maintainers of the list, me, and all people who used my mirror (it was not crowded, even at release time). A solution suitable for everybody. -- wobo
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
Op donderdag 21 oktober 2010 22:38:19 schreef Olivier Thauvin: * Maarten Vanraes (maarten.vanr...@gmail.com) wrote: Op woensdag 20 oktober 2010 18:34:24 schreef Olivier Thauvin: Hi, You can find here: http://distrib-coffee.ipsl.jussieu.fr/pub/linux/Mageia/ the current mirror tree proposal. We now have to discuss it, I think. i didn't follow the whole previous discussion about the mirror tree, but would it be advisable to have a noarch subdir, next to i586 and x86_64 ? This is not on my side. The internal distribution tree structure is more related to build system than the global mirror tree structure. At least, the tree I am suggesting neither deny it, neither make it easier. That is true, however from a globabl mirror pov; it kind of makes sense: suppose people would want to do the arm or other ports, the noarch packages can be exactly the same; therefor there is no need to list the noarch packages in i586 and having them symlinked or whatever to x86_64 which will have larger .cz and people will need to mirror both if they want x86_64 only, etc...
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
Wolfgang Bornath a écrit : 2010/10/22 Olivier Thauvinnanar...@nanardon.zarb.org: In fact we have no way to deny to someone to do a partial mirror. The question is from our point of view, do we encourage people to create non testable mirror or untrusted mirror (not update enough to ensure last security update get sync). It also make difficult the listing (eg having a gazillon of url for each distrib, which is the current problem of easyurpmi). I think this is an easy one. Do it like it was done at Mandriva. Define what a valid mirror is, then list only valid mirrors. Besides that people can put up mirrors in any way they want and use them in any way they want. They are just not listed as official mirrors of Mageia. Same happened with our Mandriva mirror. I wouldn't mirror the /debug branches, so I was told that my mirror was not official and it was taken from the list. Everybody was happy, the maintainers of the list, me, and all people who used my mirror (it was not crowded, even at release time). A solution suitable for everybody. Excellent point. As you say, a solution suitable for everyone. Although for elements which are unlikely to be useful and take up a lot of space, it could still be useful to exclude them from the mirrors. A variation of this could be, for mirrors constrained by disk space, to not keep as many older releases. For example, suppose releases are every 6 months, supported for 3 years, for 6 supported releases. Some mirrors might only keep 4 releases, or maybe 2, and still be considered official mirrors by Mageia. This would be workable, as long as Mageia required a reasonable minimum of releases. (I would say at least 2.) Of course, Mageia would have to specify which mirrors only contained some supported releases. my 2 cents :) - André (andre999)
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
Romain d'Alverny a écrit : On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 18:34, Olivier Thauvin nanar...@nanardon.zarb.org wrote: Now come the question: what is a valid mirror ?, eg, what a mirror should have as file to be valid ? Not sure if we discussed in depth MirrorBrain (http://www.mirrorbrain.org/ ) for managing mirrors index and redirections. If we were going to use it, could we, for instance, leave mirrors some liberty to mirror what branch they want (with some guidances and preferences of course) and let our MirrorBrain instance check and build the list of valid mirrors for the file actually requested? This, provided that _consistent_ branches of the tree are mirrored, and not only a file here, a file there. On one hand, this would introduce at least to other things to check: - having enough distributed mirrors that map the whole tree; - having download/install tools take this into account. On the other hand, this could allow more mirrors to take part in this, in that it may require less storage space and less bandwidth usage. This is an excellent idea, at least to some degree. Many users (like myself) like to download ISOs, which like the release repositories, will change every 6 months (or whatever the release period). Otherwise they remain static, which means no maintenance for the mirror sites. These elements tend to have relatively large space requirements. As well, they would have a very large demand (bandwidth) at release time, to lessen considerably afterwards. The update/backport/testing/debug repositories (or whatever Mageia will call them) are considerably smaller, but in constant flux, thus requiring regular updates on the mirror sites. These transient repositories would tend to have a relatively constant, lower bandwidth demand. So at least static/transient would be a natural separation. As long as the division is by Mageia's repositories, it should be workable if mirrors select repositories on other bases. I think it would be useful to keep the update/backport repositories together, since they are likely to be used together, and maybe all transient repositories. Having the ISOs on separate mirrors should cause no problem, as users are likely to download an ISO by itself, one at a time. It's not the only reason to use MirrorBrain anyway, but I wondered if this could be a complementary reason. Not sure, insights welcome. After a quick look at the MirrorBrain features page, I say let's get it. There is a problem with the current Mandriva mirror system, using Rpmdrake. I'm in Montréal, and the nearest Mandriva mirror is not very reliable. It also allows only one direct download at a time. So when I download ISOs, I go directly to another mirror, use multiple connexions, to download the ISO relatively fast, which is fine. For updates and incremental downloads it is much easier to use Rpmdrake. However, often, after having selected a package, I get an error message saying the package could not be downloaded because of a problem with the mirror site. (I suspect that usually the site is just not in sync.) MirrorBrain seems to be the perfect solution for this problem, as well as dealing with partial mirrors. Interestingly, if for some reason a mirror site cannot carry a particular package because of restrictions imposed by the country where it is located, MirrorBrain will be able to cope. So that simplifies the problem of dealing with legislative/copyright/patent restrictions as well. So at least 3 reasons to get MirrorBrain :) Cheers, Romain my 2 cents - André (andre999)
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Olivier Thauvin wrote: Hi, You can find here: http://distrib-coffee.ipsl.jussieu.fr/pub/linux/Mageia/ the current mirror tree proposal. We now have to discuss it, I think. Looks great to me and I agree with all points you made in your email. I especially like the provision of the people (no 's'!) and software directory, seem like a good idea to me.
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
2010/10/20 Wolfgang Bornath molc...@googlemail.com: I read the FM but I thought it may be outdated because it was written almost 3 weeks before this new information about the tree structure was posted. 3 weeks in this stage means a long time If the readme is showing realistic numbers I am afraid our server can't act as mirror because we only have 2x500 GB harddisks. Currently we are mirroring Mandriva 2009.1, 2010.0 and 2010.1 - altogether 360G (without Cooker). We were ready to reduce this to the current Mandriva version to make place for Mageia. But 700 is too much, sorry. -- wobo
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
* Lombard Marianne (maria...@tuxette.fr) wrote: Le 20/10/2010 18:34, Olivier Thauvin a écrit : Hi, You can find here: http://distrib-coffee.ipsl.jussieu.fr/pub/linux/Mageia/ the current mirror tree proposal. We now have to discuss it, I think. Here notes: The 'mageia_timestamp' is a file updated on the main server every 5 minutes. It allow to check is a mirror synced or not Comparing to mandriva there is no more split between devel/stable, all distributions goes into distribs/ and all isos file into iso/. I've seen that the distribs directory has sub-directory called stable1 and cauldron, will this sub-directory will be present in iso/ too ? As soon stable1 means our first distrib yes, but I don't think cauldron will be needed under iso/. -- Olivier Thauvin CNRS - LATMOS ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖ pgpDyV1EYwtIb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
* Remy CLOUARD (shikam...@mandriva.org) wrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 06:34:24PM +0200, Olivier Thauvin wrote: Hi, The peoples/ directory is dedicated to contributors and must allow anyone to share files related to the distribution (testing rpms, preworks) in an unofficial ways. How this can be setup in practice still have to be discuss. Hi, I would like to ask some details about this: As some of you might know, I’m using awesome for a window manager and have been providing RPMS for quite some time for it on my website. May I use the peoples repository to provide it as well as a customized cairo (with xcb enabled) ? As a mirror manager I say yes: I'll discuss with sys-admin team about how we can setup this, with a per user disk space limit (to avoid issue). From a project point of view it is veey different. The mirror tree is what some people will see about Mageia and I do think: - people content must be related to mageia - everything that can be included in the distrib must provide as RPMs using BS - people content must respect our policies. In a nutshell: this must be discuss. Having a people is at time just an idea, but it solve a need I had in mandriva to provide some rpms for testing purpose. Will users be able to add this as another repository ? I don't know any process to deny someone to push hdlists and rpms. However I don't think it is a good idea to use this space as an alternative to oficial mageia. The risk is to confuse people. Also, I'd like to notice this space is not a way to provide your own project, there is platform for that (sourceforge, zarb, gnu, etc...) I must admit the process was quite painful for me up till now, this sounds to me like an easy way to provide and maintain this RPM. If we switch to git for the VCS, I would just make my own branch on top of the regular cairo/awesome branch, and it would definitely ease this process. WDYT ? Regards, -- Rémy CLOUARD () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments -- Olivier Thauvin CNRS - LATMOS ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖ pgp6gMaSod0Xx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
* Wolfgang Bornath (molc...@googlemail.com) wrote: 2010/10/21 Olivier Thauvin nanar...@nanardon.zarb.org: I am not sure our mirror will reach 700MB but sice the current cooker tree is near of 80Go (w/o iso), and if I take as base 2 release per year, then I obtain 700GB in three years. So 350Go would be enough for the current version plus the previous 2 versions (including ISOs). Would that be a valid mirror? If the rules I suggested are applied and at time, yes. But be aware the tree will grow release after release. I am waiting the release cycle to be defined to know how much space we'll need. If we choose to do only one release per year, the 700GB size will occur only in 6 years. And if we don't import all rpms for mandriva the size need will be less again. Regards. -- Olivier Thauvin CNRS - LATMOS ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖ pgpMO3HyAaxWy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Mageia-dev] Mirror tree structure
2010/10/21 Olivier Thauvin nanar...@nanardon.zarb.org: I am waiting the release cycle to be defined to know how much space we'll need. If we choose to do only one release per year, the 700GB size will occur only in 6 years. And if we don't import all rpms for mandriva the size need will be less again. Yes, there are some variables not yet defined but at least for the first 3-4 releases our space will do :) Thx for explaining. Suggestion: I think it will avoid other people having the same question if you add a short sentence to the readme explaining that the 700Go is the cumulated size for 3 years :) -- wobo
