Csepp writes: [...] >>> It strikes me that this is like King Canute holding back the >>> tide. Package size growth is pretty inevitable, and even if work now >>> can bring the size down to that of a CD, the same problem will occur >>> in the not too distant future. >>> >> >> But we should really try to keep them low. >> >>> Is it really a problem? >> >> YES!!!!!!!!! >> >> Big packages means, it takes more space. If a package grows by 700 MB, >> installed on 10,000 computers, ~70 TB (70,000,000 MB) is wasted. You >> could use that precious storage to save your dad's photo, your favorite >> music, your child's video calling you "daddy/mummy" for the first time, >> etc. You would need to get more storage for that storing those >> invaluable things, so you would need more storage devices. When you buy >> more storage, the demand of increases, and therefore the manufacturing >> of storage devices increase. The more devices are manufactured, the >> more carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emission. >> >> Again, if the packages is downloaded 100 times every day, ~70 GB (70000 >> MB) of bandwidth is wasted every day. Someone on the network could use >> that to do some more important thing, like video calling a relative >> living far away. Moreover, it takes time to get the extra 700 MB for >> everyone. Assuming it takes 8 minutes on average, ~13.33 hours (800 >> minutes) of time is wasted everyday. We have limited time in our lives, >> we shouldn't waste the time. This extra ~70 GB of transmission means >> more load on the network, more load on the network devices, and >> therefore more power consumption. The more power consumption, the more >> greenhouse gas emission, since we're fossil fuel dependent. If your >> country uses nuclear power, the extra nuclear waste is a threat for the >> environment. >> >> The more greenhouse gas, the more greenhouse effect, the more global >> warming, the more climate change. You will just destroy the earth for >> future yourself and the future generation. What will you answer to >> them? >> >>> Please educate me! :) >> >> It's my pleasure to make someone aware. >> I hope this was enough. :) >> If not, just ask! >> >>> >>> -- >>> Paul >>> >>> > > Well said. Gonna add to this that developers are overwhelmingly from > privileged backgrounds. Just because we don't have a lot of users on > the mailing list who have to use satellite internet on ancient laptops > does not mean those (potential) users are not out there and wouldn't > benefit from our distro not being a bloated mess. Which sadly it kind > of is currently. I wholeheartedly recommend trying to use it on an old > netbook or an armhf device from time to time. > Like others have said: if you want to develop efficient software, use a > slow machine. :) I have a slow machine from about 10 years ago, and I'm really happy with it. (I'm writing from this machine.) I also have a slow unstable internet connection, so I understand the pain of download hundreds of MB of data without pause and resume support. (I couldn't download the latest Guix GNU/Hurd QEMU image (just around 293 MB maybe?) even trying 8-10 times.) -- Akib Azmain Turja, GPG key: 70018CE5819F17A3BBA666AFE74F0EFA922AE7F5 Fediverse: akib@hostux.social Codeberg: akib emailselfdefense.fsf.org | "Nothing can be secure without encryption."