Re: RFC: Support for zstd in .deb packages?
Hello,
On Fri, 27 Apr 2018, Guillem Jover wrote:
> But in any case, I'm still open to data and opinions given that this
> is in the end a matter of trade-offs, so → request for comments. :)
I believe that the "zstd" compression format is providing an interesting
trade-off compared to other compression formats that might be relevant in
multiple use cases. As such, I think it makes sense to support it in dpkg.
It it worth noting that rpm apparently decided to support this format too:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2018-March/040231.html
Deciding on whether it must be the default is a separate discussion
though.
BTW, there was a similar discussion on the ubuntu-devel list and it
might be interesting for others to look at it:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2018-March/thread.html#40211
The main usecase promoted in Ubuntu seems to be speeding up initial
installation to have faster availability of a new cloud server. And
possibly also minimizing the time to install updates that have
been downloaded in advance.
I also consider that optimizing the time spent in continuous integration
jobs is a worthy effort. You have the .deb available nearby but you end
up reinstalling them every time in a container and that part is often
as long as the real job in itself. And you really want the results of
those jobs to be made available as soon as possible.
> (And BTW I do not consider the current support in Ubuntu a deciding
> factor in any way, while it could perhaps fragment the .deb ecosystem,
> that's something for them to deal with IMO; should really start adding
> the vendor to the generated .deb's. :)
The above ubuntu-devel discussion clearly indicated that they want to
see it accepted in Debian first to avoid the divergence.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Support Debian LTS: https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html
Learn to master Debian: https://debian-handbook.info/get/
Reply to: