landreev

@cmbz I meant more along the lines of "waiting until we deploy 6.2 - that will include Steven's application-side rate limiting solution - and experiment with it to see if...

@DS-INRA Hi, I suggested an alternative implementation in the PR earlier today, specifically, rather than using _eithter_ the nickname of the Harvesting Client, _or_ the descriptive label for the remote...

@DS-INRA Sure. So, just to confirm, our plan then is to merge the linked PR #10464 as is, with the client nickname used for the facet (for now). Then, when...

I've edited the original description, to clarify that the downloads via the api ARE counted; and that the issue is now solely about bypassing the agreement to the terms of...

> 2025/03/17 > > * Make sure to review this in context of the SPA requirements for 6.7 (July time frame) as well. This functionality will be needed to support...

And to further state the obvious, I was focusing on how these changes may affect metadata imports. I'm assuming that the intent behind the proposed changes to the *main* language...

@setevenferey I was waiting for some feedback, but then got distracted by working on other things, so I never finished looking into this (apologies). I still would like to know...

As I mentioned earlier, in place of this pr, I created my own branch and made a new pr: https://github.com/IQSS/dataverse/pull/10481.

> @landreev as the new PR has been reviewed, should we close this one already :) ? Yes, we can close it now, or we can wait until #10481 is...

This is really awesome. For the record, testing on the IQSS prod. db clone, the results are even more spectacular than what's described in the opening comment. For example, with...