Package: xscreensaver
Version: 5.05-3

In summary: 

The Debian package of xscreensaver currently excludes many savers from the 
default install, on the basis of them using too much CPU.  This is no longer 
the case.  As those savers no longer use too much CPU, the justification for 
excluding them from the default install no longer exists, and they should be 
installed by default.


Longer version:

Currently, Debian divides xscreensaver into five packages:

xscreensaver (base)
xscreensaver-data (non-OpenGL screen savers, part 1)
xscreensaver-data-extra (non-OpenGL screen savers, part 2)
xscreensaver-gl (OpenGL screen savers, part 1)
xscreensaver-gl-extra (OpenGL screen savers, part 2)

The choice of which savers to put in the "part 2" packages instead of the "part 
1" packages was made by Jose Luis Rivas Contreras <ghostba...@gmail.com> and 
Tormod Volden <debian.tor...@gmail.com> back in 2007 or 2008 by running each of 
the screen savers and timing their CPU usage, and putting those with high CPU 
usage in the "part 2" packages, not installed by default.

I believe these are the tests they ran, years ago: 
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Screensavers

It has always been my goal with xscreensaver that *no* screen saver should use 
significant CPU when running.  Since he ran his tests, I have fixed those 
savers that were using too much CPU (mostly by adjusting their default settings 
to be gentler).

It is my belief that currently, none of the screen savers included with 
xscreensaver use significant CPU when running with their default options. 

Therefore, it is my belief that the -extra packages are unnecessary, and their 
contents should be folded in to the -data and -gl packages, reducing the number 
of xscreensaver packages from 5 to 3. I would like this to happen so that the 
default is to install the *complete* xscreensaver package instead of just an 
arbitrary subset of it.  Since most users will just take the defaults, they 
won't even know that the "part 2" savers exist, and many of them are pretty 
cool!  And the justification for excluding them no longer exists.

Over the past 3 years, I have repeatedly asked Jose to re-run the tests he ran 
by which he decided which savers to push into the "extras" package, and let me 
know if he still sees any savers using excessive CPU (because I don't believe 
there are any, but if there are, I would like to fix that bug.)  

I'm sorry to say that he has never responded.  

In fact, I haven't gotten any mail from him at all since September 2008, so 
even though he is still listed as the Debian maintainer of xscreensaver, I'm 
not sure he is still paying attention.

So -- if there is anyone reading this who considers themselves to be in charge 
of the Debian xscreensaver package, please reconsider the split between the 
"default" and "extras" packages, because I believe it to be based on old data 
and on assumptions which are no longer true.

Thanks...




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Reply via email to