On 5/28/2013 14:09, Mark Felder wrote:
On Fri, 24 May 2013 16:23:18 -0500, Kenta Suzumoto <[email protected]> wrote:
- It fetches almost 700 patches from what seems like a dial-up
connection in AUSTRALIA.
Australia's deploying fiber, so joke's on you!
But honestly this is horrible. I'm sitting at my desk at a well-peered
ISP with plenty of bandwidth and low, low latency and these patches are
taking forever. Someone should just add a pre-fetch routine that
downloads the first 1000 patches in a tarball, puts them in distfiles,
and they well all be verified and the remaining few be fetched normally.
Someone should teach upstream a serious lesson about versioning. Maybe
someone just needs to fork vim and tag releases on github so we can
actually have a sane upstream.
Good grief!
Well Mark, haven't you realized yet that there's actually no problem and
this is "almost completely about (your) laziness"[1]? All patches only
take 74 seconds to download[2] so there is no sympathy for your
obviously single data point anecdote, you're clearly doing something
wrong. You need to stop complaining and start think about folks with
slow connections[3] who also rebuild Vim frequently. Your prefetch/fork
idea is obviously unworkable because the security issues can't be solved.[4]
[1]http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2013-May/083880.html
[2]http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2013-May/083849.html
[3]http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2013-May/083844.html
[4]http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2013-May/083882.html
Regards,
John
P.S. Hopefully it's obvious this is tongue in cheek.
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
