On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:53:52 -0500 Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Mike McGrath (mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > > Dennis's request was to host the rawhide binary trees, which are ~15GB > > > each, not for the release ISOs. With this understanding, and after we > > > remove FC1-5, FE1-5, and the obsolete test releases (that'll free up > > > 300GB), we should be OK. > > > > Except that as of right now we don't have anywhere to put FC1-5 and FE1-5, > > For this release I had planned on (if we needed it) moving F[C,E]2 to > > archives if needed. Is it ok to completely remove these trees or do we > > have to (or want to) keep them available? > > If we don't have the space to archive them, then maybe we have to punt on > secondary arches for the moment. Why? Hosting is important, but not key to making it work is it? josh _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
