Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New third party mirrors

[Michał Górny]

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:16:05 +0200
Corentin Chary <corentin.chary@×××××.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:19:11 +0000
> > "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 04:50:49PM +0200, Corentin Chary wrote:
> >> > >> $ ./mirrors.py --all --count
> >> > >> 297 ?? ?? http://pear.php.net
> >> > >> 297 ?? ?? http://pear.php.net/get
> >> > >> 88 ?? ?? ??http://pecl.php.net
> >> > >> 88 ?? ?? ??http://pecl.php.net/get
> >> > > These are already mirror bouncers. If you visit the above,
> >> > > you'll get the closest mirror for downloading.
> >> > And since there is already ~10 "mirrors" with only one actual
> >> > backend, should they go to thirdpartymirrors or not ? If not,
> >> > what about this pseudo-mirrors already present in
> >> > thirdpartymirrors ?
> >> I think we should add the pseudo-mirrors, but explicitly mark them
> >> as such in the file, so that they don't get duplicate entries
> >> added (eg adding us.pear, de.pear and the pear bouncer is bad.
> >> Should have just the bouncer).
> >
> > It'd be great if we could add some kind of additional mirror
> > entries, which would be used by repoman to signal missing mirror://
> > entries but won't be used for downloads.
>
> Yep, we could put that in it too:
> github		http://github.com/downloads/
> https://github.com/downloads/

Per spec, portage can choose a random mirror of the list. If we put
entries like that, these two will be equally possible as the preferred
cloud. URL -- while they redirect one to another.

We might decide on some common syntax like preceding all extra entries
with '-' but I don't want to be the one deciding here.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny