Upcoming Mirrormanager 2 production deployment

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 09:59:09 +0200
Pierre-Yves Chibon <pingou at pingoured.fr> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 09:37:36AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Dne 24.4.2015 v 19:32 Kevin Fenzi napsal(a):
> > > https://admin.stg.fedoraproject.org/mirrormanager2/
> > >
> > >
> > > https://mirrors.stg.fedoraproject.org/
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > Should there be any difference between these two links? Opening
> > them in browser, I endup at:
> > 
> > https://admin.stg.fedoraproject.org/mirrormanager2/
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > https://admin.stg.fedoraproject.org/mirrormanager2///
> 
> mirrors.stg is now redirecting to admin.stg../mirrormanager2 that is
> because in MirrorManager1 the matrix of products/version/arch was
> outside of the main application while in MirrorManager2 we integrated
> it.

Right, the top level of those two links are in fact the same. 

But they aren't the same otherwise... for example, in yum or dnf
config you would use something like:  

https://mirrors.stg.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=fedora-21&arch=x86_64

to get all base fedora-21 x86_64 mirrors. 

> > And what is Fedora 64 and RHEL 7? Is this just due to some testing
> > data?
> 
> AFAICS, RHEL7 might in fact be RHL7 and Fedora 64 is some kind of
> artifact coming from some invalid parsing of atomic data iiuc.
> We should try to nuke them and see if the UMDL script brings them
> back.

RHEL7 is rhel7 beta and rc. We carried them to help with the beta and
rc, but they didn't end up using mirrormanager in the urls they listed
in their repo files, so it was kind of a waste. ;( 

Fedora 64 might be ia64 secondary? Not sure on that one.

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20150427/b0cbb7bf/attachment.sig>