On Fri, Dec 07, 2007 at 08:48:10AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
My concern with jigdo is with how many people use it? It seems silly
to
host both torrent and jigdo (as much of this letter points out the
benefits of switching to jigdo, those benefits disappear if we simply
add jigdo to the mix. Most people already have bittorrent. Lets say we
were going to give Jigdo a trial run for Fedora 9 and we were going to
judge jigdo a success if a certain % (compared to bittorrent) use
jigdo. What % would that be?
Some people CAN'T use bittorrent because of firewalls. There should
be no reason at all why anyone couldn't use Jigdo, because it uses
standard FTP or HTTP to download the slices. There are clients
available for all the important OSes.
Jigdo and Bittorrent are really two different beasts that do different
things to benefit different use cases. Bittorrent is best for getting
all the bits for an ISO set when you have nothing currently. Jigdo is
good for getting bits that are packed differently but are otherwise
identical to the bits you have already, plus it can also get all the
bits via separate and possibly distributed downloads. So Jigdo in
this sense has a superset of the functionality of Bittorrent.
I think we need to have some overlap by providing both services,
certainly at least for a transition period, but perhaps even long
term. The real benefit to Jigdo is that you can distribute one set of
files that represent the Everthing universe of content via HTTP/FTP
(or ISOs via Bittorrent), and then a bunch of Jigdo templates for all
the various spins.