[sword-devel] Remote Module Repository Wiki
greg.hellings at gmail.com
Fri Nov 5 06:15:24 MST 2010
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 8:02 AM, Peter von Kaehne <refdoc at gmx.net> wrote:
> I think Troy, the concern is correct.
> For the publisher with some decent IT muscle and budget a proper repo must be better, but for the small town church with a website and a couple of modules to share - zip and http is a must.
> Having a multiplicity of methods of getting modules into the system would certainly be easier.
> My preference:
> 1) keep current methods - it is best for huge numbers of modules and it is probably also best for anyone with enough money to have a fixed ip and a server, able to run anonymous ftp
While I very strongly agree that FTP should not be held up as the best
solution for everyone (I have worked with and for several
organizations who flat out refused to ever allow FTP of any type to be
a part of their systems and who primarily ran IIS for their web
content), I'm not sure the argument from excessive cost is accurate.
Annual DNS leasing from my provider is less than $40/year (I want to
say it's only about $17, but I might be remembering incorrectly)
Dedicated VPS hosting with dedicated IP address, about 20 GB of drive
space and full root access to my system is $19.95/mo.
If $23 per month is excessive for anyone who really intends to
distribute modules, they can almost certainly find someone else in the
SWORD community who will be willing to host it for them at very little
to no cost. Additionally I can host any low-volume traffic I want
from home by registering with a place like dyndns.com and setting up a
server on any connection that is moderately reliable (my home). The
option is not viable for people in developing countries but is
certainly more than viable for any first world country I'm aware of.
More information about the sword-devel