This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: "Mirrors list order is snafued" - What is the order supposed to be?


Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Lapo Luchini wrote:
>>
>>> I guess the best would be to sort by "ping time" (smalest to
>>> bigger) to help reduce unnecessary trans-oceanic downloads.
>>> But of course it would need to check them each time... or may it be
>>> cached in the local setup.ini?
>>
>> Ping time would probably be rather unfriendly to the mirrors :-)
>
> Would this seriously be a concern?  I can't imagine that the cygwin
> user base is that update-happy that they'd be flooding download
> servers (which would have to serve them multimegabytes anyway) with
> pings.  Especially when we still have folks going, "Hi, I recently
> upgraded from B6.  Why did you break everything?".

I don't know. But pinging 30 to 40 servers seems rather a heavyweight
solution.

>> I was thinking treeview Continent/Country/Site.
>>
>
> NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  NOT MORE
> TREEVIEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> ;-)
>
> Seriously, what I'd really like to see us work towards is a UI-less
> mirror selection system as the default.  99% of users couldn't give a
> whit which server the stuff is coming from, as long as it works.
> Hence, a UI can only cause grief for all involved, and the more
> involved it is, the more grief it will cause.

Nevertheless, wouldn't you agree that the treeview I proposed above would be
an improvement over the current listview?


Max.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]