Hi!
Marius Bakke <mba...@fastmail.com> skribis:
> Pierre Neidhardt <m...@ambrevar.xyz> writes:
>
>> Duh, I confused these with the github generated archive, sorry about
>> that.
>>
>> Is there any preference between git-fetch and url-fetch?
>
> url-fetch requires less bandwidth, and does not depend on 'git'.
>
> Though the most important distinction is that uploaded releases
> sometimes contain pre-processed sources (e.g. documentation) that need
> additional dependencies or scripts when building from the raw repository
> (this is why you often need to add autoconf, libtool & friends as inputs
> when building Autotools projects from git).
>
> I don't know whether there is a difference between the uploaded fmt
> zipball and the git repository.
Other considerations:
- Bandwidth requirement for source code downloads has never been a
criterion so far.
- Git references are nice because they’re (roughly) content-addressed.
- ‘guix lint -c archival’ archives Git references on Software
Heritage; it does not archive tarballs (though SWH will do it
for us eventually.)
Ludo’.
