gem server horked?

[Jeff Wood]

------=_Part_18304_8592575.1129576292026
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

This morning seems the gem server is having a bit of a fit ... getting
timeouts during "updating gem index" ...
Anybody else experiencing this?
j.

--
"http://ruby-lang.org -- do you ruby?"

Jeff Wood

------=_Part_18304_8592575.1129576292026--

 

[James Edward Gray II]

This morning seems the gem server is having a bit of a fit ... getting
timeouts during "updating gem index" ...
Anybody else experiencing this?

Yes, I've been having trouble this morning too.

James Edward Gray II

 

[Erik Veenstra]

This morning seems the gem server is having a bit of a fit

Yes, I've been having trouble this morning too.

I've been having trouble this evening, too.

gegroet,
Erik V. (in Amsterdam, GMT+2)

 

[Jeff Wood]

------=_Part_19084_8302652.1129579369348
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

True, my view wasn't geographically sensitive.
j.

I've been having trouble this evening, too.

gegroet,
Erik V. (in Amsterdam, GMT+2)

--
"http://ruby-lang.org -- do you ruby?"

Jeff Wood

------=_Part_19084_8302652.1129579369348--

 

[Jeff Wood]

------=_Part_19652_31948796.1129581389124
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Has anybody that's part of that project caught this yet ??? I'm surprised
more people aren't yelling ... I've got a bunch of Ruby-Nubies that I'm
trying to get setup, and this is a pretty bad first experience.
I know the discussion about RubyGems being part of the standard distro is
still open ... but, it's just a black eye to have something "standard" be
down like this.
I may be interested in mirroring them ( at least for me and the team I wor=
k
with ) ... is there some mechanism for me to do that?
I need a working solution soon, if theres anything I can do to help, pleas=
e
let me know.
j.

True, my view wasn't geographically sensitive.
j.

--
"http://ruby-lang.org -- do you ruby?"

Jeff Wood

------=_Part_19652_31948796.1129581389124--

 

[Tom Copeland]

Has anybody that's part of that project caught this yet ??? I'm surprised
more people aren't yelling ... I've got a bunch of Ruby-Nubies that I'm
trying to get setup, and this is a pretty bad first experience.
I know the discussion about RubyGems being part of the standard distro is
still open ... but, it's just a black eye to have something "standard" be
down like this.
I may be interested in mirroring them ( at least for me and the team I work
with ) ... is there some mechanism for me to do that?
I need a working solution soon, if theres anything I can do to help, please
let me know.

The problem is that RubyForge is on a relatively small network
connection - 768K. Mirroring out large files helps tremendously, but
there's still a ton of content being served through that pipe.

Yours,

tom

 

[Ryan Leavengood]

The problem is that RubyForge is on a relatively small network
connection - 768K. Mirroring out large files helps tremendously, but
there's still a ton of content being served through that pipe.

Back when I was first envisioning the original RubyGems, I had
thoughts about serving gems using a peer-to-peer system. You can see
some of this old brainstorming still (in the old section):

http://rubygarden.org/ruby?RubyGems

I still think this might be a good idea. These days we have even more
P2P protocols to choose from. Even if we didn't do client-side P2P, it
might be nice to at least have some kind of server P2P, or some kind
of redudancy.

As great of a service that is provided by RubyForge (thanks Tom!), it
still represents a weak link. We don't want to turn away new users
with something like this.

Ryan

 

[Tom Copeland]

Back when I was first envisioning the original RubyGems, I had
thoughts about serving gems using a peer-to-peer system. You can see
some of this old brainstorming still (in the old section):

http://rubygarden.org/ruby?RubyGems

I still think this might be a good idea. These days we have even more
P2P protocols to choose from. Even if we didn't do client-side P2P, it
might be nice to at least have some kind of server P2P, or some kind
of redudancy.

Cool, yup, Austin just opened a thread on this sort of thing on
rubygems-developers:

http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubygems-developers/2005-October/001794.html

As great of a service that is provided by RubyForge (thanks Tom!), it
still represents a weak link. We don't want to turn away new users
with something like this.

Nope, right on, I agree wholeheartedly.

Yours,

Tom

 

[Nicholas Van Weerdenburg]

wget -c http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/rails-0.13.1.gem
http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/rake-0.6.2.gem
http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/activesupport-1.1.1.gem
http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/activerecord-1.11.1.gem
http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/actionpack-1.9.1.gem
http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/actionmailer-1.0.1.gem
http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/actionwebservice-0.8.1.gem

gem install rake-0.6.2.gem activesupport-1.1.1.gem
activerecord-1.11.1.gem actionpack-1.9.1.gem actionmailer-1.0.1.gem
actionwebservice-0.8.1.gem rails-0.13.1.gem


--
Greg Donald
Zend Certified Engineer
MySQL Core Certification
http://destiney.com/

Cool.

http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems for a listing of gems. Click on desired
one to download.

Does downloading like this bypass mirrors? Is there a way to manually
download of a mirror if that's the case?

Thanks,
Nick

 

[Tom Copeland]

Does downloading like this bypass mirrors? Is there a way to manually
download of a mirror if that's the case?

Nope, currently all the Gems are served off gems.rubyforge.org - unless
of course you use the "--source" parameter to point to some place where
someone is hosting another Gem server. It's the regular files (i.e.,
the Win32 installer) that are served via the mirrors.

But I think the Gems guys are working on a mirroring solution...

Yours,

Tom