Targz is about 3/4 the size of zip for a bag of Python dists I tested. Zip inside a second zip would provide the same compression. No word on the Weissman score.
Tar isn't exactly a single format. For Unicode try POSIX-1.2001 aka pax format tar. Python defaults to gnutar. Zip has good Unicode support. Exactly how much simpler is exactly one file format? On Sun, Aug 21, 2016, 06:57 Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 August 2016 at 09:21, Robert Collins <robe...@robertcollins.net> > wrote: > > > > tl;dr: I think standardising on .tar.gz would be a rather shortsighted > > thing to do, given how many Windows users Python has and how much of a > > different supporting .zip makes for workflow on that platform - with > > no negative impacts on any other platform. > > One thing that has (IIRC) come up in a pip bug in the past - how do > tar and zip format fare in terms of Unicode support? IIRC, older > versions of (I think) tar format don't include an encoding, nor do > they mandate UTF-8, so they have the potential to break when used > cross-platform. Sorry, I can't recall exact details. > > I think it's important that whatever format we mandate works with full > Unicode filenames, and the available user tools support that. > > Paul > _______________________________________________ > Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig >
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig