Based on http://www.php.net/mirroring.php, this is a bug to solve.

Thanks for the info.

I don't think we will be adding the logo back..
We have no way of verify those and they could have been everything from an viagra advert to slandering.


All mirrors are of course listed on all download pages and mirror selection pages.
I'm unsure if we need to have them _allover_ the place.
Other providers that provide us for example with vcs infrastructure, other websites (wiki/pecl/people/..) and everything else we need only get one link back from the thanks page.

Hi guys,

I'm aware we are just mirror providers and we have no voice in the way you design PHP.net's web site. However, it feels like you are changing the terms we agreed to provide these mirrors because of your new design... not the other way around.

Please don't get me wrong, we (and this time "we" as the provider of 3 of your mirrors since a couple of years) love to provide/donate infrastructure to PHP and other open source projects. But, with all due respect, I have to say that I don't agree with the way you are suddenly changing the terms here.

Also, I'm a bit confused about the sentence "have them _allover_ the place". Each mirror had their own logo at the top and their own URL at the bottom... but just in that specific mirror each. Not "allover" the place. And in regards to the logo, I never heard of a complaint in all these years. Most of us (mirror providers), if not all, are serious bussineses and institutions, not "viagra" dealers**.

But if you are concerned about the type of "banner" that might end up posted on your mirror sites, you could review each of them and host them on a central location where only you have access to. This shouldn't be much a of burden. After all, there are less than 100 mirrors and most of them remain without a single change for years.

I don't know which is the proper protocol for handling situations like this, but I kindly request you to please get in contact with PHP's Infrastructure team. And then please update your mirroring.php, if need be, accordingly, so current and future mirror providers are aware of the (new) terms and conditions. 

Thanks for taking into account my comments.

All the best,

Jaime


**An excerpt from your /mirroring.php page:

""Applications to join the official mirror program are reviewed on a case-by-case basis, but we will only approve those from ISPs and web hosting providers; universities and state-recognized academic institutions; PHP-centric web development firms; and PHP user groups and individual enthusiasts. Under no circumstances will we even review applications from marketing firms, website portals or directories, or anything of questionable moral or legal standing. We also reserve the right, at our discretion, and without warning, to refuse any application for any reason, or to suspend or expell any active mirrors if it is discovered that any information on the application was false or otherwise incorrect, or if the mirrors fails to remain in compliance with the official mirrors program.""

What happened to the link from the sponsored mirror site ?

> Also, I'm a bit confused about the sentence "have them _allover_ the place"

The logo was only on the frontpage, but mirroring credits where given on over 60.000 pages.

This seem excessively unfair to those who provide us with other critical infrastructure if you want to measure that up.




> And in regards to the logo, I never heard of a complaint in all these years.
> Most of us (mirror providers), if not all, are serious bussineses
> and institutions, not "viagra" dealers**.

I'm not disputing that the vast majority (hopefully all) are serious businesses.
I have however removed mirrors which had stolen our traffic or done evil things (accidentally or not).




I am also not sure why you are asking me to consult the infrastructure team..
Have you forgotten that I was the one who approved your ch2.php.net originally in 2008/2009?
I am well aware of how mirroring works.


-Hannes

Hey Hannes,

> I am also not sure why you are asking me to consult the infrastructure team..
>Have you forgotten that I was the one who approved your ch2.php.net originally >in 2008/2009?
>I am well aware of how mirroring works.

I'm sorry, but all I can see on this system is email accounts, not names, and I don't know by heart everyone's email accounts at PHP, and the one you use for the list is from @gmail.com, IIRC. ;)

All the best,

Jaime

I will look at adding the logo back.  There were a number of changes made all over the place with no reasonable discussion and I'm in total agreement about the logo being something offered as a benefit to those who provide mirrors.

Hannes, your argument about how it would "measure up" to those who provide critical infrastructure is insufficient, in my opinion, because those folks are - more often than not - thanked prominently on the homepage.

As mentioned on the IRC channel used by PHP mirror providers we (and also others that did respond) didn't setup the logo (at least not every one did please an image online for it). Combining this with the reaction by bjori it might be a good idea to only put the link back (and possible also on the other pages that are not located on a mirror and now get a link back on the thanks page). However this last part isn't as important for us (but it would be nice).

On request I can provide a patch to get the link back at the bottom of every page on the main website.

Note:
- We host a PHP mirror (nl1), an rsync mirror (europe) and a VPS for some other PHP project pages (svn/people/gtk)

A few thoughts:

 - The homepage is hit far fewer times than the cumulative result of all the docs pages, so comparing the homepage to the docs page isn't appropriate; I'll back Hannes on this one.
 - I do think we can add a link in the footer; Hannes or anyone have problems with that?

While I can agree with Hannes that mirror providers had more exposure through the frontpage image and footer link than those providers only mentioned on the thanks page, I still think that changing this should have been required more discussion and maybe even a vote.

This is how we were doing it for years, this is what we advertise on mirroring.php and this is what the providers accepted when offered the mirrors.
Changing it without discussion and then telling the providers that they should be content what's left is underhanded.

and about the arguments of the viagra ads: a rouge mirror could do that and everything else, so I don't think that it is a valid objection about the logo, but AFAIR only a small fraction of our mirrors used the option to show their logo, and it was only on the frontpage and maybe would require some UI work to put it back in a nice way, so I personally don't really mind that it is gone.

Added mirror sponsor image back to homepage sidebar in 0c461e0a6a.

http://git.php.net/?p=web/php.git;a=commitdiff;h=0c461e0a6a

Seems like this ticket is not yet fully closed (some flip flopping on git).
As a recent mirror, we might have a different opinion:

We do _not_ want to have a footer link on every page. Not only do we think it looks unprofessional, but also we feel we are being credited unfairly compared to companies mentioned at the thanks.php.

Further more, we do not expect that (even though it was mentioned on mirroring.php), as it is a rather unusual practice, compared to other open source mirroring systems.

For a few days we saw our logo showing up on the frontpage and thought it was a nice feature.
Given the fact that the /docs/ pages are visited more frequently than the homepage, we believe this would be a non intrusive feature to credit the mirror in addition to the download page (after all, a PHP mirror not only provides simple downloads but actually does host a dynamic website). But we would not see this as a "must".

To make things short: we are proud to be part of the PHP.net network and glad we can help out with our humble resources and we therefor do not need "extra treatment". Those who are interested will now our involvement.