Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: brewster Date: Apr 30, 2004 12:35am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: GD GD

You are right that user inserts should get processed quickly, and jon took steps to do exactly that. If they are not, then we should fix it.

The slow down might be in the curatorial processes if you are indeed seeing many day delays. This is the work of volunteers to try to maintain quality. We are very very happy that these volunteers spend so much of their free time on this.

Therefore, we are trying to do what we can on the technology, but there might be other issues that are harder to change (without more volunteers :)

Thank you for working to keep an archive up-to-date and current.

-brewster

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: simon c Date: Apr 30, 2004 12:48am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: GD GD

On that note, I'm pretty much positive the slowdown is not in the curatorial process - the Live Music Archive volunteer admins are efficient enough at checking and approving (after the derivations process has finished) that I rarely see shows sit unapproved for more than 12-24 hours. I can help out (I approve pretty much all the other collections) if that ever gets to be an issue. Yay.

s!
https://archive.org/post/14928/gd-gd
archive.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-44
42867
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:U6XEXPGZXXAHPDS44TOLAJHOVVYL5H75
<urn:uuid:9c1748a4-547b-46fa-85fd-44fc83fd072e>
2016-10-28T21:55:58Z
207.241.224.2
sha1:L5RBLAWWKOIGDHR4ONJRTIA6BVQPIIGC
<urn:uuid:7403a73f-8908-46c1-aeed-301627b0498b>
https://archive.org/post/14928/gd-gd
length
response
<urn:uuid:18ad2d88-ffbd-427f-bbf4-ef432ba1c1bd>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-171-6-4.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-44
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for October 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf