Replies: 1 comment
-
I like it! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Today, CCC is roughly structured as
I propose that we separate the "ask an upstream" step into a fairly unique infrastructure:
Each upstream should be fetched, parsed, and archived on a schedule.
CCC's, then, is removed of the need to store an in-memory cache of fetched data to avoid hitting the upstreams too often, and (as a bonus) we get an archive of previous responses.
Each upstream should be represented as two repos:
$upstream-parser
and$upstream-archive
.$upstream-parser
would be responsible for fetching the data from the upstream and parsing it into ~a structured representation1, and pushing it to$upstream-archive
. It would do this via GitHub Actions on a defined schedule.$upstream-achive
, then, has GitHub pages enabled, and acts as a stand-in for the upstream's server.Thoughts?
Footnotes
ideally using some standard data format, such as RSS/Markdown, vCard, or ICS; my reasoning for this is that we can hopefully avoid needing to change the data representation later, because that affects the ability to look at the history via Git. ↩
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions