Обсуждение: Killing off anoncvs.postgresql.org
Does anybody have any use for this site anymore?
We've kept it in order to make old links work, I think. Beyond the original "keep it for a few weeks/months after the git migration in case we change our mind" - and I don't think we'll be going back to cvs :)
The reason I ask is this system is getting hammered by AI bots these days, and the cvsweb software is incredibly slow and fragile so it goes down very often, and generates lots of alerts.
Given I haven't seen any reports from actual users about it being down, I do suspect we have very close to zero real users of it and that the only access is bots.
Thus, the suggestion is to shut the service down completely. We will of course keep a tarball of the cvs repository itself around (this is already on our download site in pub/dev/archive), but would replace the host with a hard redirect to the root of the git repository site. It would *not* track the individual files or anything, just send the entire host to the git server.
Thoughts?
//Magnus
On 2026-Feb-18, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Does anybody have any use for this site anymore? > > We've kept it in order to make old links work, I think. Beyond the original > "keep it for a few weeks/months after the git migration in case we change > our mind" - and I don't think we'll be going back to cvs :) > > The reason I ask is this system is getting hammered by AI bots these days, > and the cvsweb software is incredibly slow and fragile so it goes down very > often, and generates lots of alerts. > > Given I haven't seen any reports from actual users about it being down, I > do suspect we have very close to zero real users of it and that the only > access is bots. Another point against spending too much effort keeping it, is that the pgsql-committers archives URLs are still broken even with the site up. If you go back to the old archives, the links go to developer.postgresql.org, not to anoncvs.postgresql.org. For example: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20050201211106.023568B9D05%40svr1.postgresql.org If you manually edit the URL and change "developer" to "anoncvs", the link works. So, I'm not sure it's terribly valuable. > Thus, the suggestion is to shut the service down completely. We will of > course keep a tarball of the cvs repository itself around (this is already > on our download site in pub/dev/archive), but would replace the host with a > hard redirect to the root of the git repository site. It would *not* track > the individual files or anything, just send the entire host to the git > server. I guess there's not all that many people interested in following those old links anymore. -- Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "La rebeldía es la virtud original del hombre" (Arthur Schopenhauer)
On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 04:16:59PM +0100, Álvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2026-Feb-18, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> Does anybody have any use for this site anymore? I didn't even know it existed. >> We've kept it in order to make old links work, I think. Beyond the original >> "keep it for a few weeks/months after the git migration in case we change >> our mind"... I've regularly dug through very old messages in the archives for several years and I can't recall ever needing to follow such a link. I do see old mailing list links that seem to redirect, though. >> ...and I don't think we'll be going back to cvs :) Really!? :p > Another point against spending too much effort keeping it, is that the > pgsql-committers archives URLs are still broken even with the site up. > If you go back to the old archives, the links go to > developer.postgresql.org, not to anoncvs.postgresql.org. For example: > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20050201211106.023568B9D05%40svr1.postgresql.org > > If you manually edit the URL and change "developer" to "anoncvs", the > link works. > > So, I'm not sure it's terribly valuable. Huh, yeah. >> Thus, the suggestion is to shut the service down completely. We will of >> course keep a tarball of the cvs repository itself around (this is already >> on our download site in pub/dev/archive), but would replace the host with a >> hard redirect to the root of the git repository site. It would *not* track >> the individual files or anything, just send the entire host to the git >> server. > > I guess there's not all that many people interested in following those > old links anymore. +1 -- nathan
> On 18 Feb 2026, at 16:07, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > Thus, the suggestion is to shut the service down completely. +1 > replace the host with a hard redirect to the root of the git repository site. It would *not* track the individual filesor anything, just send the entire host to the git server. Why redirect it and not just let it join developer.postgresql.org in the retirement home? -- Daniel Gustafsson
On Wed, 18 Feb 2026 at 17:21, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
> On 18 Feb 2026, at 16:07, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> Thus, the suggestion is to shut the service down completely.
+1
> replace the host with a hard redirect to the root of the git repository site. It would *not* track the individual files or anything, just send the entire host to the git server.
Why redirect it and not just let it join developer.postgresql.org in the
retirement home?
Fair point. I think I was just thinking "never let a domain name go because someone will take it", but this is a hostname and not a domainname... So yeah, that does sound like a better solution.