On 2012-03-20 23:25, Russ Allbery wrote: > Niels Thykier <ni...@thykier.net> writes: > >> I have been considering if it would be a good idea to (conditionally?) >> compress certain collection files. In some cases they are actually >> rather large and I suspect compression will generally be good in such >> cases[1]. Admittedly, there are also cases where it gives little to no >> size reduction. > > Compressing some stuff is not a bad idea. The indices and file-info > collections seem like the most obvious targets. People doing greps can > switch to zgreps. >
True, but it kind of implies that they are aware of changes we make in the Lab. :) > I would prefer to never conditionally compress anything; either always > compress it or never compress it. That way, the file names and access > method are always consistent. > Originally I had thought of reusing _open_data_file (from harness) to access the file(s). But I do see a point in making the access consistent (especially for people doing "grep -r" checks). Though it leaves the question of how to migrate from uncompressed to compressed. If we do "compressed"-only we have to do a full run (or a find -name | xargs gzip). I guess that is reasonable to do, we just need to tell people maintaining lintian.$domain.$tld to do the same. Alternatively, we can bump the version of these collections and have Lintian slowly migrate as packages are (re-checked), but that means the (non-Lintian) access will be inconsistent until all packages have been re-checked. ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
