Re: New Markets
> | However, getting the 1.1 release out took priority over changing the
> | source packaging format.
>
> Sorry, but I disagree -- but since Debian isn't my work, you may ignore
> my opinion.
I am firmly convinced that if I filled everybody's imperative-list, the
system would _never_ be released. We ran in that mode for a long time.
> It's obvious that
> the untouched source (e.g. emacs-19.30.tar.gz) should stay at debian.org
> and its mirrors, while the package maintainer only submits
Should we really be optimizing project-internal FTP bandwidth over all
other goals? I think it would be better to create an archive containing
the source and diff, in extractable form, in a single file. The source
would be un-modified but encapsulated inside the source package. The diff
would be in that same package, and a single command would extract the
source, apply the diff, and build the binary package for one or more
architectures. That solution emphasizes maintainer convenience over
the FTP bandwidth that the project uses. Maintainers who had a severe
bandwidth problem could build their packages on our internal system,
so that uploading would not be necessary. Now that I think of it, they
could even upload only the diff, as you wish, and do everything else on
the master system.
FTP bandwidth for the mirror sites has a cost, but not a severe one so
far. Of course users have an entirely different cost structure - they
mostly download binary packages.
Gosh, you have a lot of ideas for someone who refuses to participate
in the project. If you followed all of the argument that the developers
do over this sort of thing, you might be more in tune with us. I think
that we'd show you some angles on these issues that you have not
considered. We _really_ listen to people who do the work of implementing
their own ideas.
Bruce
--
Pixar Animation Studios: Reality is not our business.
Pixar's "Toy Story" $184.79M domestic, $101.7M overseas and counting.
Reply to: