On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:16:46AM +0000, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Mark Thomas <markt_at_apache.org> wrote:
> > On 14/06/2011 10:26, Tony Stevenson wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 09:21:48AM +0000, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> >>> We have asked them to use a different mirror, but several of them (in
> >>> my own testing) appear to have the same problem. For a user
> >>> attempting to get source code, it can be a frustrating experience,
> >>> which ultimately leads to admit defeat and walk away.
> >>
> >> If you fancy patching the cgi, I dont see that it is impossible to do that.
> >
> > No patch required. Only listing mirrors updated since a given timestamp
> > is already supported. See the bottom of this page:
> > http://www.apache.org/dev/mirrors.html
>
> Yes, it is supported, but recommended against, to avoid flooding the
> up-to-date mirrors.
>
> In IRC, Gavin noted that the list will only includes mirrors sync'd in
> the last 24 hours. This information is self-reported, and the issue
> is that mirrors reporting themselves as up-to-date aren't really so
> (they lack the subversion directory).
This is due to the mechanism that is used to check the mirror is upto-date. We check $mirror/DATE this is a file maintained via rsync. However, it is not impossible for someone to modify their rsync job to not include a given path, such as subversion in this case.
Just report them via JIRA, and we will deal with it.
>
> The artifacts in question were added to www.apache.org/dist 5 days ago.
>
> -Hyrum
>
--
Cheers,
Tony
---------------------------------------
Tony Stevenson
tony_at_pc-tony.com // pctony_at_apache.org
tony_at_caret.cam.ac.uk
http://blog.pc-tony.com
GPG - 1024D/51047D66
--------------------------------------"
Received on 2011-06-14 14:06:11 CEST