On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 22:44 +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > ]] Goswin von Brederlow > > | Tollef Fog Heen <[email protected]> writes: > | > | > ]] Goswin von Brederlow > | > | My feeling is that 3.0 (git) format adds bloat to the source packages > | > | that hardly anyone ever uses, makes it that much harder for any > | > | non-git user to edit the source and is of little extra value when the > | > | maintainers git is month or years further along. > | > > | > Even if the upstream VCS has moved on, you save a bit of bandwidth by > | > having something that comes with half the history, even if you don't > | > have all of it. > | > | Weigh that against the bandwidth spend for mirrors and for people that > | do not need or want the history and the extra cost in terms of needing > | more CD/DVD images to contain a source snapshot. Also the cost for > | snapshot.debian.org having to have the extra bloat for every single > | version uploaded. For a worst case take linux-2.6 as example. > > If we (as I do) consider history part of the source, that size increase > is irrelevant. > > | Also why would you download the source package in the first place if > | what you really want is a git checkout. The extra bandwidth for a git > | checkout would only be as much as the 3.0 (git) format would lack in > | history. > > Because I want to add a patch that changes a behaviour in a stable > package, and I want to add that patch in a way that gives me the least > work, both when writing it, but also when bringing it forward. Also, my > mirror might be local; git.d.o and random upstream repositories > certainly are not.
It's possible to specify a (signed) tag somewhere. You don't need a separate blurb for very release. -- Saludos, Felipe Sateler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
