[Asterisk-doc] I'm thinking that FTP makes more sense for Volume One than CVS does

[Darryl Ross]

jim at digitalchemy.ca wrote:
> If Asterisk 1.0 becomes as popular as we all know it will, the ever increasing volume 
> of downloads will also put an enormous burden on Asterisk.org's FTP server. 
> Obviously, sharing the load amongst several mirrors will quickly become very 
> attractive. 

Digium's FTP server only has 768k of outbound bandwidth (according to the Wiki), hence why when 
1.0RC1 was announced quite a number of people immediately put it up on their servers as mirrors 
(myself included).

I have sent an email to Mark suggesting that perhaps some sort of formal mirror arrangement 
might be a good idea, something akin to how the samba or PHP projects run their sites. I 
haven't had any response from him yet. I might think about adding a ticket to mantis, if 
there's a category that would suit.

> Probably the distribution strategy for 1.0 will need to be different from the method 
> popular with the  development community.

CVS is a tool for developers who need to keep track of changes, whereas prepackaged tarballs, 
RPMs, DEBs, etc are more for end-users. Just because there is a tarball doesn't mean people 
can't use CVS if they want HEAD.

Personally, I'll moving our network of servers to 1.0 and keeping them there rather than 
running CVS HEAD. As someone else in the thread has mentioned it reduces my administration 
tasks and it also means that I can easily make sure that all my servers are running the same 
version.

Regards
Darryl


-- 

Darryl Ross
Senior Network Engineer
OEG Australia
Email: darryl at oeg.com.au
Phone: 61 8 81228361

If you want to live up to the whole "There is more than one way to
     do it" slogan, you have to give someone a swiss army chainsaw ...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-doc/attachments/20041011/b60342ff/signature.pgp