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

["Kevin Kubasik" <kevin kubasik net>]

My personal opinion stands that if they (RedHat) are willing to cover
the hardware/bandwidth requirements (even if they are somewhat
minimal) a dict.gnome.org 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 dict.gnome.org 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 gnome.org.
>
> > 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
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-infrastructure
>


--
Cheers,
Kevin Kubasik
http://blog.kubasik.net/