From: ptkwt@...1.aracnet.com (Phil Tomson)
Date: 2002-10-23T02:37:36+09:00
Subject: Re: RAA.succ?

In article <007d01c278d8$0b4cd950$85222fc0@sarion.co.jp>,
NAKAMURA, Hiroshi <nahi@keynauts.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> From: nobu.nokada@softhome.net
>> Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 11:28 AM
>
>> > So what's the latest thinking on RAA.succ?  
>> 
>> RAA = "http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/raa.html"
>> def RAA.succ
>>   "http://www.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/app/raa/"
>> end
>
>We www-admin@ruby-lang.org rewrote current RAA which got
>a little old and rickety.  We will replace RAA in this
>or next week.
>
>Changes:
>- lightweight top page
>- iso8859-1 => UTF-8
>- added simple keyword search
>- show projects by the specified owner
>

Those are all great changes, but it still doesn't address the fact that 
the RAA is just a list of links to potentially non-existent locations.  
Key packages could be lost after their creators loose interest.

The RAA needs a change in structure not just a change of interface.  When 
someone creates a module they 
want to put on the RAA  they should actually upload that module code 
to the RAA server where it then resides.  There should also be at least one 
mirror of the RAA repository.  This (as I recall) is the way CPAN works - 
it guarantees that crucial modules will not just disappear when someone 
changes ISPs or looses interest.  You'll always be able to get a 
particular module from the RAA or it's mirror(s).

There are packages now listed on the RAA that no longer exist - someone 
wrote about not being able to find FastCGI this morning.  I also tried to 
get an extension for top that no longer is available.  I'm sure there are 
other dead links on the RAA and it's only gonna get worse as time goes on.

Phil