On 19 December 2012 02:20, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Frank.  To the best you can, if you can try to stack up several
> changes per package version it will help slow our suffering by
> SqueakSource's scalability issue until a solution can be found.

In this particular case that approach wouldn't have worked, but sure, OK.

> Morphic, in particular, is a very extra-chunky-sized package..

Oh of course, I should have realised that would throw out any
comparison between copying Morphic through the web interface and
copying tiny little ReleaseBuilder through the MC Browser. Mm, so I'd
have to adjust my complaint to "if only there was a progress bar or
something". Ah well, the main thing is that I thought I'd crashed the
site!

frank

> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 18 December 2012 20:11, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>>> On 2012-12-18, at 19:39, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Like, minutes to upload something through the web interface slow.
>>>> Copying through an MC browser is much faster, where "much faster"
>>>> means "on the order of 30 seconds".
>>>>
>>>> frank
>>>
>>> You mean after clicking the "move version" button to move a version from inbox to trunk, it takes minutes to finish?
>>
>> Yes, sorry, that's what I meant rather than uploading. I also noticed
>> general requests like trying to open source.squeak.org to find out why
>> things are so slow, were also really slow. Some eventually timed out,
>> with proxy errors. (I don't have the errors to hand; they're at work.)
>>
>> frank
>>
>>> - Bert -
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>