Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: why are we still distributing the portage tree via rsync?

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 12:34 PM William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 11:40:53AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 11:32 AM Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o> wrote:
> > > 2) we have a large infrastructure of rsync mirrors, which we do not for
> > > git.
> > >
> >
> > Do we need them.  I've yet to see somebody complain about poor syncing
> > performance from github.  I imagine we could just use that and a few
> > other free mirroring services to distribute the tree.
>
> I don't feel comfortable relying on github as a primary means of
> distributing the tree due to our social contract. It is a value-added
> kind of service, but we should not rely on it.
>

Do you know that all our existing mirrors are 100% FOSS?

It is a mirror.  You upload something.  Somebody else downloads the same thing.

If we were distributing tarballs via http would we really care if the
mirror is running apache vs IIS?  Do we even check our existing
mirrors for such things?  Do we care that they're running on coreboot
too, without an IME?

Hey, I'm all for having all the mirrors we can, and it isn't like
mirroring git is particularly difficult.  I just think that there is a
double-standard being applied when it comes to get.  I completely get
the argument when it comes to things like issues/PRs/etc since those
aren't distributed, but for git itself you really just need something
that supports the protocol and it is trivial to replace.  Certainly
for anything we host we should use FOSS because it is the cleanest
solution anyway.

-- 
Rich