Re: User services (was: Re: dict server)

My personal opinion stands that if they (RedHat) are willing to cover
the hardware/bandwidth requirements (even if they are somewhat
minimal) a would be a nice way to ensure a certain
degree of uniform user experience. However, are we willing to take on
the management requirements of such a system? Maintaining a
mulit-lingual centralized lexicon could mean lots of micro to keep the
dictionaries up to date. If we are just willing to mirror another dict
site, then why not just make a DNS round robin?

-Kevin Kubasik

On 4/6/06, Reinout van Schouwen <reinouts gnome org> wrote:
> Hello Owen, all,
> On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:51:19 -0500, Owen Taylor wrote:
> Sorry for getting back on this so late, I'm swamped with my thesis and
> had forgotten about it until now. To refresh everyone's memory, this
> discussion resulted out of bug 167366, it was a request to run a
> dictionary server on
> > I don't think we need to be scared of the idea that we might swamp our
> > limited server capacity (even 8 servers is a pretty small set), or swamp
> > Red Hat's bandwidth. If we create things that are genuinely useful and
> > interesting to people, it's easy to fund-raise for new servers, and it's
> > easy to find people to host bandwidth. Swamping is good.
> So if I understand correctly, Red Hat is willing to add more hardware
> and bandwidth if the services we want to offer require it. The question
> then is, how do we move forward on this issue? Who should we talk to about
> adding this service? It would be nice to have it ready in time for testing
> during the GNOME 2.16 release cycle.
> regards,
> --
> Reinout van Schouwen
> _______________________________________________
> Gnome-infrastructure mailing list
> Gnome-infrastructure gnome org

Kevin Kubasik

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]