On Sat, 2024-03-30 at 15:17 +0000, Eddie Chapman wrote:
> Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Sat, 2024-03-30 at 14:57 +0000, Eddie Chapman wrote:
> > 
> > > Note, I'm not advocating ripping xz-utils out of tree, all I'm saying
> > > is wouldn't it be nice if there were at least 2 alternatives to choose
> > > from? That doesn't have to be disruptive in any way, people who wish to
> > > continue using and trusting xz-utils should be able to continue to do so
> > > without any friction whatsoever.
> > 
> > So, you're basically saying we should go out of our way, recompress all
> > distfiles using two alternative compression formats, increase mirror load
> > four times and add a lot of complexity to ebuilds, right?
> > 
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Michał Górny
> > 
> 
> Yes that's a very good point, that was something I was wondering in
> weighing up both sides, what the costs would be practically, as I don't
> know the realities of running Gentoo infrastructure. And maybe the costs
> is just too high of a price to pay.
> 
> I wonder if increased use of git repos rather than distributed tarballs
> could be part of a solution to those issues, although that could put quite
> a storage burden on every user. Unless they were all shallow git pulls and
> the user could optionally choose to tar up the git directory after clone
> with compression.  But yes granted then there is even more ebuild
> complexity.
> 

Should we convert git repositories to Mercurial and Bazaar too, to avoid
relying too much on a single tool?

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny