Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2016-04-10
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2016 09:37:18
Message-Id: 4c88545c-44d1-41ff-843c-8313c6c6b21c@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2016-04-10 by Ulrich Mueller
1 On Sunday, April 3, 2016 8:07:13 PM CEST, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
2 >> In two weeks from now, the council will meet again. This is the time
3 >> to raise and prepare items that the council should put on the agenda
4 >> to discuss or vote on.
5 >
6 > I would like the council to follow up on the results of robbat2's
7 > portage repo usage survey:
8 > https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/c2ffa62837fd4cbdd42945bf57b09b25
9 >
10 > The following two points should be discussed and possibly be voted on:
11 >
12 > 1. Should we continue providing ChangeLog files in the rsync
13 > distribution?
14
15 If space is the sole consideration, then, changelogs can be removed from
16 manifests, and $PM default rsync command can exclude '*/*/ChangeLog*' (or,
17 at least, leave the possibility to do it). This solution seems to be what
18 would please everyone since robbat2's survey results can be interpreted in
19 many ways, but for Q2, more than 50% voted "something but only if it were
20 optional".
21
22
23 However, I think I recall a nice recap of some infra guy on how much time
24 it took to generate them. IIRC it was bearable at the moment (a few hours)
25 but still slow. Assuming infra hardware stays the same, where will we be in
26 1, 2 or 5 years wrt to generating changelogs ? Is there something that can
27 be improved on the software side or are we just bound to have slower and
28 slower rsync distribution generation ? If so, how much slower does it get
29 over time ?
30 What I mean there is that if changelog generation takes 5 days then we
31 don't have much of a choice but dropping them.
32
33 Alexis.

Replies