On Sat, 2024-03-30 at 15:17 +0000, Eddie Chapman wrote: > Michał Górny wrote: > > On Sat, 2024-03-30 at 14:57 +0000, Eddie Chapman wrote: > > > > > Note, I'm not advocating ripping xz-utils out of tree, all I'm saying > > > is wouldn't it be nice if there were at least 2 alternatives to choose > > > from? That doesn't have to be disruptive in any way, people who wish to > > > continue using and trusting xz-utils should be able to continue to do so > > > without any friction whatsoever. > > > > So, you're basically saying we should go out of our way, recompress all > > distfiles using two alternative compression formats, increase mirror load > > four times and add a lot of complexity to ebuilds, right? > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Michał Górny > > > > Yes that's a very good point, that was something I was wondering in > weighing up both sides, what the costs would be practically, as I don't > know the realities of running Gentoo infrastructure. And maybe the costs > is just too high of a price to pay. > > I wonder if increased use of git repos rather than distributed tarballs > could be part of a solution to those issues, although that could put quite > a storage burden on every user. Unless they were all shallow git pulls and > the user could optionally choose to tar up the git directory after clone > with compression. But yes granted then there is even more ebuild > complexity. >
Should we convert git repositories to Mercurial and Bazaar too, to avoid relying too much on a single tool? -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
