SteveKing schrieb:
> I have a slight problem with sourceforge: it doesn't do backups at
> all! We'd have to backup our data ourselves regularly. And backups for
> sourceforge are really necessary from what I've heard :(
What would we be hosting on sourceforge? The content of our CMS which is
currently about 100K uncompressed SQL. There's no need to backup the
CMS itself because nothing is customised. What else do you want to
backup? Don't tell me you want daily backups of installers. Sourceforge
has got tons of download mirrors, so there are tons of backups.
> And since Lübbe only has a dialup connection, that would leave the
> whole backup stuff to me...
I feel my dial up connection breaking down while downloading 100K...
>
>> If we stick with Berlios then do what Stefan says. If we move to
>> SourceForge then the msi and doc files can probably go there, making
>> updates easier. But not a big deal - we don't release that often.
>
>
> We shouldn't update the docs on the website in between releases. We
> have to keep the docs up to date with HEAD, but most people only use
> official releases - having the docs mention stuff which isn't released
> is very bad.
Did anyone mention updating the docs in between releases?
>
>> Not sure about the FAQ. Is it working better than the static page did?
>> It has a much wider range of questions, but that is because we never
>> added to the static FAQ.
>
>
> The only thing that might be better is the search function. But let's
> be honest here: most people don't use that anyway but just use it to
> ask support questions.
>
Again: If we install the CMS, people can't ask questions via the CMS if
we disable the function.
> And let's not forget the mailing list stuff. Sure, we could switch
> that to sourceforge or berlios too, but what would then happen to the
> commit mails, issuetracker, ...?
Did anyone talk about moving the mailing list stuff? Why should we?
It'll take me an hour to move the issuetracker from berlios to any
hoster that offers php & mySQL.
>
> Seems that just isn't the 'perfect' solution. So I'd vote for keeping
> everything as it is.
The solution isn't perfect, but I think that tigris & sourceforge is
better than tigris & berlios. Sourceforge has got more power under the
hood even if there are outages and slow response times as well.
Just because something isn't perfect that's no reason to try to improve
the existing situation.
My suggestion:
tigris: repository, mailing lists and a download mirror for the msi files.
sourceforge: main download site, issue tracker, CMS containing FAQ and
the static pages from tigris.org.
You were complaining about complicated file release procedures on
sourceforge / berlios. Today I mirrored the 1.1.7 release on sourceforge
in 20 minutes of which I spent 10 downloading and uploading the msi
files, because each ftp upload connection seemed to be limited to
30K/second. The other 10 were spent clicking and setting properties.
Cheers
-Lübbe
--
___
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Tue May 17 22:56:02 2005