Kevin Rosenberg wrote: > Joey Hess wrote: > > 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? > > That's an interesting thought. One disadvantage of a archive of issues > is that it would have to be redownloaded everytime an a new issue is > added to the archive. Though separate issues do increase the size of > the Packages file, they reduce the need to download updates to > multi-megabyte archives. I think that we have more room for growth in the mirror network than we do on the lowest-usable-level debian machines and limited user time which Packages bloat affects. Anyway, there are all kinds of middle ground. Per-year bundles of archives, or only moving old issues into the one big bundle after you have twelve of them (so only updating the big bundle once per year), etc. > Web browsers are fine if you have an fast, persistent internet > connection. I often travel with my laptop without network > connectivity. What Colin said. -- see shy jo, who spends at least half of his computer time offline, and caches *everything*
Attachment:
pgpjfPR_jhZO0.pgp
Description: PGP signature