2008/1/27 Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > Most places will have a transparent proxy with no additionnal Linux or > RH-specific setup. Instantmirror or rsync local mirrors assume the > infrastructure is designed around Fedora, when in fact Fedora installs > have often started unofficially bottom up. It is critical for Fedora > market penetration that those initial stealth installations go well > without someone bothering the IT teams with them (because their first > reaction will be to ban anything unofficial that gives them more work). I can see larger networks having transparent proxies and such setup, but the home user enthusiast or small business? I don't think they would be as likely. I see InstantMirror of filling a niche for the small office or home user enthusiast as a low barrier entry into caching updates locally. There is a thread on fedora-list now with a Fedora user looking to setup some form of caching for updates and such [1]. InstantMirror seems an option to fit these need well. > Therefore, efforts to create the perfect Fedora-specific mirroring setup > fall IMHO wide of the mark. A less-than-perfect system that works as-is > with existing infrastructure without any specific setup is much more > preferable. This is more to the point I was trying to make. Should InstantMirror be trying to be the perfect Fedora-specific mirroring setup? I think it is a good tool for the small office and home user enthusiast niche. The ones just looking to cache updates locally with minimal fuss without the need to maintain a full fledged local mirror or implement a transparent proxy. Maintaining as such a tool might be a better goal for the InstantMirror project than trying to grow it into a tool that it is not. Best Regards, Jeffrey [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2008-January/msg04152.html -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
