Re: dropping Priority field from binary packages for most packages
Ansgar wrote: > could we drop the Priority field from most packages? Most packages use > "Priority: optional" and this is just noise in d/control (source > package). Tools should just assume "optional" when no other value is > set. This seems like a great idea. People regularly note the overhead of each Debian package (as a standard argument made against having more packages), and this seems like a good way to reduce that overhead. Priority is definitely the *easiest* such change to make. This will primarily benefit individual package control files, and has relatively little impact on the compressed Packages index, since compression deals well with the repetition. For the 12M Packages.gz file in current sid, this would save ~22k. By contrast, eliminating the "MD5sum:" field (in favor of "SHA256:") would save 1.6M. And eliminating the one-line "Description:" (in favor of getting it along wiht the full Description from the translated files) would save 1.2M.
Re: dropping Priority field from binary packages for most packages
Ansgar: Hi, could we drop the Priority field from most packages? Most packages use "Priority: optional" and this is just noise in d/control (source package). Tools should just assume "optional" when no other value is set. [...] I would like to drop it pretty much everywhere, most importantly debian/control in source packages (as often humans edit these). I support this. I am happy to look into having debhelper clear the `Priority` field in the deb if it is redundant early after the release. Additionally, if the missing field breaks tools that cannot easily updated, I can have dehelper inject the field again (even if it is missing from d/control), so people can benefit in d/control already and we fix the .deb version when the infrastructure/tooling is ready. The debhelper tooling already did something this for "Multi-Arch: no", which caused problems at some point. In that sense, there is already "prior art" for debhelper managing asymmetry between d/control and DEBIAN/control. But it could be dropped in other places (CONTROL in .deb and Packages indices) as well. Yes please! Best regards, Niels
Re: dropping Priority field from binary packages for most packages
On Sat, 13 May 2023 at 16:13, Ansgar wrote: > > Hi, > > could we drop the Priority field from most packages? Most packages use > "Priority: optional" and this is just noise in d/control (source > package). Tools should just assume "optional" when no other value is > set. > > Currently Policy documents Priority to be mandatory in 2.5: > > +--- > | Each package must have a priority value, which is set in the > | metadata for the Debian archive and is also included in the > | package’s control files (see Priority). > +---[ https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#priorities ] > > As well as only recommended: > > +--- > | The fields in this file are: > | [...] > | - Priority (recommended) > +---[ > https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#binary-package-control-files-debian-control > ] > > I would like to drop it pretty much everywhere, most importantly > debian/control in source packages (as often humans edit these). But it > could be dropped in other places (CONTROL in .deb and Packages indices) > as well. +1 for decluttering, especially human-maintained metadata files. Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
dropping Priority field from binary packages for most packages
Hi, could we drop the Priority field from most packages? Most packages use "Priority: optional" and this is just noise in d/control (source package). Tools should just assume "optional" when no other value is set. Currently Policy documents Priority to be mandatory in 2.5: +--- | Each package must have a priority value, which is set in the | metadata for the Debian archive and is also included in the | package’s control files (see Priority). +---[ https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#priorities ] As well as only recommended: +--- | The fields in this file are: | [...] | - Priority (recommended) +---[ https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#binary-package-control-files-debian-control ] I would like to drop it pretty much everywhere, most importantly debian/control in source packages (as often humans edit these). But it could be dropped in other places (CONTROL in .deb and Packages indices) as well. Regards, Ansgar PS: Please note the following disclaimer: I might or might not be payed for this change and refuse to disclose financial incentives or other conflicts of interest; I might or might not suggest to revert this if my sponsors' (should they exist) priorities shift elsewhere. -- Certified Software Terrorist (Crime of File Relocation)
