From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why aren't ELPA packages compressed? Date: Tue, 05 May 2015 10:24:03 -0400 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87fv7b9k70.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <21831.40666.491742.170889@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <871tiv5fs9.fsf@tromey.com> <21832.50724.538350.789451@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1430835953 23684 80.91.229.3 (5 May 2015 14:25:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 14:25:53 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 05 16:25:45 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ypdn4-0006XM-Ui for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 05 May 2015 16:25:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39697 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ypdn3-0006m2-Pz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 05 May 2015 10:25:41 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40588) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ypdma-0006lg-Mb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 May 2015 10:25:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YpdmS-0001Z8-Vi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 May 2015 10:25:12 -0400 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:39838) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YpdmS-0001Wa-Q8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 May 2015 10:25:04 -0400 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YpdmQ-00064E-ND for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 May 2015 16:25:02 +0200 Original-Received: from c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([98.229.61.72]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 05 May 2015 16:25:02 +0200 Original-Received: from tzz by c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 05 May 2015 16:25:02 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 24 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-98-229-61-72.hsd1.ma.comcast.net X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.130012 (Ma Gnus v0.12) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:/bvkMyCLT0SMv9PbUzUkNkQA0Go= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:186233 Archived-At: On Tue, 5 May 2015 15:31:16 +0200 Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 05 May 2015, Tom Tromey wrote: >> When I wrote package.el, one goal was that installing a package >> would not require any external tool. So, e.g., that is why I chose >> tar archives and not some other format -- tar-mode.el can unpack >> them without a helper. >>> From NEWS I see that zlib was added in 24. So, that's the reason -- >> at the time it wasn't available. It sounds like it is optional, >> though, which seems like a problem for users. UM> As was previously remarked, gzip could be used if Emacs isn't linked UM> against zlib. And I wonder if there are still any systems nowadays UM> where neither gzip nor zlib isn't readily available. Both compressed and uncompressed tarballs could be available, each with a separate signature. Then package.el could just get the smallest one it can handle locally (so stuff like bz2 could also work). The web server would require no more than the original storage for each compression method but the downloads would be far smaller and faster. And it's backwards compatible. Ted