[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#765980: 2nd thoughts



Hi,

so while I don't think (anymore) that the space wins are really worth removing
this package, I still think we should go head with the removal, see below.

But first, this is how much space we gain:

4,0K	debian-edu-artwork_0.902-3.dsc
4,0K	debian-edu-artwork_0.903-1_amd64.changes
4,0K	debian-edu-artwork_0.903-1.dsc
12K	debian-edu-artwork_0.902-3_amd64.buildinfo
12K	debian-edu-artwork_0.903-1_amd64.buildinfo
24K	debian-edu-artwork_0.902-3.debian.tar.xz
24K	debian-edu-artwork_0.903-1.debian.tar.xz
28K	debian-edu-artwork_0.902-3_all.deb
28K	debian-edu-artwork_0.903-1_all.deb
444K	debian-edu-artwork-lines_0.902-3_all.deb
444K	debian-edu-artwork-lines_0.903-1_all.deb
1,8M	debian-edu-artwork-softwaves_0.902-3_all.deb
1,8M	debian-edu-artwork-softwaves_0.903-1_all.deb
6,2M	debian-edu-artwork-spacefun_0.902-3_all.deb
8,0M	debian-edu-artwork_0.903.orig.tar.xz
15M	debian-edu-artwork_0.902.orig.tar.xz

So, 7mb in the source package. And 6mb is indeed neclectable, given we install at least several hundreds of MBs…

But, re-reading #766313 made me reconsider: in this bug it was suggested
to generate spacefun png's from spacefun's .svg's during package build. That
was deemed as not possible as the .svg's were previously generated from the
.png's because the original SVGs were *lost*, thus such svg would be worse
quality… IOW: we have spacefun in stretch because we were lax with copyright
requirements. This was 3 years ago and the problem is actually older.

See https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=765981#25

So I'm not willing to spend time anymore on this very old artwork which only
has one (vocal, active and nice!) user. Sorry.


-- 
cheers,
	Holger

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: