Re: magazine packagine (was Re: Bug#181860: ITP: phrack-issueXX -- Phrack Magazine Issues)
Op vr 21-02-2003, om 17:50 schreef Joey Hess:
> Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > We have for some time now heard complaints that the Packages files are
> > too big. Is it worth it to package each issue of a magazine separately?
> > We already have 70 packages of Linux Gazette (counted on my
> > mostly-stable machine) - plus some additional packages such as lg-all
> > and lg-base. I see a worrying trend here.
>
> Me too. I think it makes sense to have separate packages for the last n
> editions, where n is some reasonable number like 2 or 3 (sometimes we
> get behind in our magazine reading). But after that, why not just one
> big package for all the back issues, if they must be packaged?
Because that would imply a peak in traffic near the beginning of the
month, when you have to download the new 'lg-backissues' package.
Besides, linuxgazette is officially part of the LDP, created by 'the
community'. It is far from a 'usual' magazine.
I hear nobody complain about HOWTO's in the archive.
</ex-lg-maintainer hat>
I do agree that reducing the number of lg-* packages could be a good
idea, though.
> > Would it make more sense to instead make an installer that can download
> > desired issues? (The same installer could then be used for Linux
> > Gazette, ridding us of many packages.)
>
> It makes more sense for me to just use a web browser, but whatever. :-)
Strange as it may sound, some people still have to pay per minute to be on-line.
For these people, it may be more interesting to have these issues (which contain
a vast amount of newbie-oriented documentation, BTW) on CD-ROM, or to have to
download them only once instead of every time they want to view them.
--
wouter at grep dot be
"An expert can usually spot the difference between a fake charge and a
full one, but there are plenty of dead experts."
-- National Geographic Channel, in a documentary about large African beasts.
Reply to: