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