Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/05/02/03:50:52
At 02:49 PM 04/30/2001 +0200, you wrote:
>OTOH, I suspect DJ may have done this on purpose, to keep the bandwidth
>requirements reasonably low.
>
>The same problem can happen easily once you start to provide regular
>development snapshots as a tarball: people will start to run cron jobs to
>always download the latest tarball to their own machines, no matter
>whether they actually need to have the latest and most potentially
>instable stuff there is or not. This could cause bandwidth exhaustion on
>DJ's server.
Very true. But it would be better if there were some other way of getting
prerelease sources besides using CVS. This would enable others to test it
more fully. Okay, one could argue that this would lead to proliferation of
unstable code which would be a Bad Thing for everyone involved. If this is
what is feared to happen, then use an encrypted zip archive and send the
decryption password to all djgpp-workers subcribers only. And hey, if the
guy is smart enough to crack an encrypted zip archive, then one would guess
that he's also smart enough to figure out what he's in for when he
downloads potentially unstable code.
>(Even Sourceforge doesn't provide automated snapshot tarballs, by default.
>You have to do that yourself, as a project admin, if you want it).
Is there even a remote possibility that nightly/weekly/monthly DJGPP CVS
archives would be put in SourceForge with all concern to decreasing
bandwidth demands on DJ's server?
- Raw text -