[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Rubyforge RubyGem propagation delay

Michael Neumann

4/21/2008 7:48:00 AM

Hi,

I noticed that when I upload a new gem to Rubyforge, it takes several
hours until I can install it via "gem". If you try within that period
you are getting a 404 error (at least here in Germany, maybe the mirror
is very slow), which is annoying and leads to all kind of bug reports,
and that you have to delay the announcement of a new version for hours.

I understand that mirrors are neccessary in this growing Ruby community,
but if the index list (the list of available gems) would be fetched from
the mirror, the 404 wouldn't happen.

Alternatively, a message other than 404 would be helpful to the user
that he or she should retry later. Or what about the idea to
contact the master rubyforge server, in case of 404?

Any other solutions?

Thanks!

Michael
6 Answers

Tom Copeland

4/24/2008 1:47:00 AM

0


On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 16:47 +0900, Michael Neumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that when I upload a new gem to Rubyforge, it takes several
> hours until I can install it via "gem". If you try within that period
> you are getting a 404 error (at least here in Germany, maybe the mirror
> is very slow), which is annoying and leads to all kind of bug reports,
> and that you have to delay the announcement of a new version for hours.
>
> I understand that mirrors are neccessary in this growing Ruby community,
> but if the index list (the list of available gems) would be fetched from
> the mirror, the 404 wouldn't happen.
>
> Alternatively, a message other than 404 would be helpful to the user
> that he or she should retry later. Or what about the idea to
> contact the master rubyforge server, in case of 404?

Hi Michael -

Another option is for RubyForge to just serve up gems for the first 24
hours or so after they're released. Jeremy Kemper did some nice rewrite
rules for this:

http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=14803&group_id=5&am...

Just need to get that into place...

Yours,

Tom

Ryan Davis

4/24/2008 11:07:00 PM

0


On Apr 23, 2008, at 18:47 , Tom Copeland wrote:

> Another option is for RubyForge to just serve up gems for the first 24
> hours or so after they're released. Jeremy Kemper did some nice
> rewrite
> rules for this:
>
> http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=14803&group_id=5&am...

I have a clean and simple 404 handler written in ruby that allows for
pattern matching and redirection. Such a thing could easily be used by
the mirrors to throw back at rubyforge.

Tom Copeland

6/27/2008 3:27:00 AM

0


On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 08:07 +0900, Ryan Davis wrote:
> On Apr 23, 2008, at 18:47 , Tom Copeland wrote:
>
> > Another option is for RubyForge to just serve up gems for the first 24
> > hours or so after they're released. Jeremy Kemper did some nice
> > rewrite
> > rules for this:
> >
> > http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=14803&group_id=5&am...
>
> I have a clean and simple 404 handler written in ruby that allows for
> pattern matching and redirection. Such a thing could easily be used by
> the mirrors to throw back at rubyforge.

I just added these rewrite rules and wrote some PHP code to populate the
file that the RewriteMap reads... that should cut the deploy time down
to the gem index rebuild interval (currently 30 minutes)...

Yours,

tom

fedzor

6/27/2008 3:35:00 AM

0


On Jun 26, 2008, at 11:26 PM, Tom Copeland wrote:
> some PHP code

excuse me?

what would it take to rewrite the site to be in ruby? How long do you
think it would take one to do it?

-------------------------------------------------------|
~ Ari

Tom Copeland

6/27/2008 3:42:00 AM

0


On Fri, 2008-06-27 at 12:34 +0900, fedzor wrote:
> On Jun 26, 2008, at 11:26 PM, Tom Copeland wrote:
> > some PHP code
>
> excuse me?
>
> what would it take to rewrite the site to be in ruby? How long do you
> think it would take one to do it?

Hard to say... it's a decent-size PHP app:

============
$ wc -l `find . -name "*.class"` | grep total
36384 total
$ wc -l `find . -name "*.php"` | grep total
50944 total
============

But a nicely-done Rails app would probably be 1/10th the size...

Yours,

tom

Ben Bleything

6/27/2008 4:03:00 PM

0

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008, fedzor wrote:
> excuse me?
>
> what would it take to rewrite the site to be in ruby? How long do you think
> it would take one to do it?

It's a fork of the code that originally ran SourceForge. It's not a
small app.


http://g...

It works well enough. The fact that it's not in Ruby doesn't seem like
a compelling enough reason to change.

Ben