I'm fine with using Gihtub wherever possible.. That would for sure reduce the server load.. If we put it in a repo we should definitely create a seperate repo for these tasks.
Nonetheless I could offer a european mirror server ;)
Yeah, probably make sense.
Name of the repo? Service?
Actually we don't have anything at the moment. lol
When I pushed that commit, I was thinking to let the installed version decide what it wants, if you look at the file I linked (let's not concentrate on the typo :P) is it structured like:
window.elkVersion = new Array({
base: '1.0',
latest: '1.0 alpha'
});
So I was exploring the possibility to have in that file an array of objects with a "base" version (1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 2.0, etc.) and a latest version for that line, so that it would be elk to decide what is the latest version of the "current" install and not a remote script.
The big advantage would of course be we are serving a static file.
Unless, the most meaningful decision is taken: support only one version at any time. That would make everything much easier. :P
I don't think we would have a bandwidth problem with github for a few lightweight static files, I think a lot of that TOS came about when there were some rather large disto's being served?
Anyway almost seems like using the raw files from a elkarte/site repo would be the best, we just have to, update them when needed, although I don't think GitHub raw will do a 304 so it will always return the data, maybe pages does?
Thinking ... Could we also just do site releases, download the zip (all those static files) and update the db as needed?