Hello Craig,

I think, after your proposal you have *one* *logical* map, *physically*
distributed over multiple submaps connected via some network, building a
graph of nodes being all at one level (no hierarchy).

This sounds more complicated as using a hierarchical graph like
- one logical map at one server, as current;
- one logical map distributed over a tree structure of servers (with
childs all sharing the same parent content), as planned;
- one logical map distributed over a tree structure of servers (like the
former), with *mirrors* for some important nodes (e.g. the top node) for
improving robustness, as making sense IMO.

In such a hierarchy it is always clear, where to look for *all* the
public packages (and their dependencies), seen from the local node;
namely at the immediate parent (or its mirror).

Multiple parents with *different* content (in opposite to mere mirrors)
seems to be more difficult to realize to me than the former variants,
and the complexity of your proposal comes thereafter.

The advantage - to be fair - of such a highly decentralized solution
would be, that it could be very robust against technical or social
failures in large parts (the internet is an example).

The disadvantage would be, that installing some dependency mechanisms
appears very difficult to me in such a scenario, too. For dependencies
there has to be some place (the resolver), where all needed ones are
available at a whole! And not all of them are to be coupled to a certain
package: e.g. conflicts of some configurations may be detected later and
be stored aside the packages. In addition it probably makes sense to
have some control about who is allowed to change the dependencies, which
also seems to be more difficult to reach in a fully decentralized model
than in a hierarchical one.


BTW: The security aspects could/should become more important in the
future for every chosen solution.


Greetings
Stephan

Craig Latta wrote:
> Hi Göran--
> 
> 	I think a better analogy is with IRC, not DNS. We could set up a relay
> network of servers that share information about where to find things. In
> particular:
> 
> 
>>"Hey! Where did you find that? Oh, I didn't know about *that*
>>server.... Hmmm, it isn't up now, do you have a copy you can email
>>me?"
> 
> 
> 	We could avoid that: having found any server in the network, a user
> would find out which other servers provide access to the desired
> artifact. Artifacts can be mirrored on multiple servers, so one server
> being down doesn't necessarily pose a problem. The analogous IRC
> situation is looking for another user; each server can provide
> information about how any user in the network is connected.
> 
> 
>>"Hi! I just posted my little Application on my own map *here*. Bye!"
> 
> 
> 	The server that person used could join the server network, providing
> visibility as described above. If the community cares about protecting
> against servers going down, then someone will mirror the application on
> one or more other servers.
> 
> 
>>"Hmmm, does anyone have a list of all known maps at this point in
>>time? Sure, here is my list, but I heard that Ned has a bigger list
>>with more stuff on it."
> 
> 
> 	That would be a manual recapitulation of what the server network
> already did automatically.
> 
> 
>>"How many packages are there for Squeak? Well, we don't really know.
>>Ok, but can someone tell me where to look to find ZZZ? Sure, you can
>>look here, and here, and here, and perhaps over there..."
> 
> 
> 	Again, the server network can tell you where things are.
> 
> 
>>I mean - come on! Am I the ONLY ONE afraid of these scenarios?
> 
> 
> 	I'm not afraid of them because they seem quite avoidable.
> 
> 
>>Am I the ONLY one who remembers how it was before SM?
> 
> 
> 	Now you're setting up a false set of choices. :)  There are more of
> them than just "before SM" (and other things) and SM.
> 
> 
> 	have a good trip!
> 
> -C
> 
> --
> Craig Latta
> improvisational musical informaticist
> craig at netjam.org
> www.netjam.org
> [|] Proceed for Truth!
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Stephan Rudlof (sr at evolgo.de)
   "Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis.
    You can't simply say, 'Today I will be brilliant.'"
    -- Kirk, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3