Mirror services (Re: CTI - Making a decision for glibc.)

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Feb  3, 2026, "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 1/30/26 11:06 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
>> Hi Alex,
>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 11:26:06PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>> Maybe it would make sense to try them out with things that would be
>>> actually useful, not risky, and not viable for our current providers to
>>> offer, such as git and web mirrors run by separate organizations,
>>> bringing about some of the redundancy that I mentioned as potentially
>>> useful back when this started being discussed.
>> I think this is a good suggestion. Having (read-only) mirrors of git
>> repos and the mailinglists seem like safe things the LF could provide
>> that would add value. We can setup grokmirror for the git repos and
>> the LF already knows how to handle public-inbox archives.

> In practice for a move for glibc we could retain the Sourceware git
> repos as read-only grokmirror repos?

For avoidance of doubt, my suggestion was to set up a git mirror at the
LF, as an experiment, not to move the primary to the LF with a mirror at
Sourceware.  I'm not sure that got through.

Now, if it were up to me, we'd be going for live-replicated git hosting,
so you could push to or pull from any of them interchangeably.  I even
said that before, long ago.

Has anyone looked into https://radicle.xyz?  Maybe it could be used on
the server side to keep the repos in sync, so that people wouldn't
*have* to use radicle to collaborate, but they still *could* if we make
it so.  I may have mentioned this before, but I'm not sure.  I haven't
used it myself, but the idea behind it fascinates me.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker            https://blog.lx.oliva.nom.br/
Free Software Activist     FSFLA co-founder     GNU Toolchain Engineer
Learn the truth about Richard Stallman at https://stallmansupport.org/