On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 09:01:19AM +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > Have I missed your posting the results of this? Especially, what is > the preferred ordering of ChangeLog entries?
I just hadn't finished putting the results into a long-term format quite yet, but did so this afternoon: http://dev.gentoo.org/~robbat2/201602-portage-survey/ I have included a CSV of the public answers, excludes only the last question about contact info. Some remarks about question #2 and #3: Q2: Reduce local disk usage by excluding ChangeLogs? ---------------------------------------------------- It was unfortunately pointed out to me very late that my question #2 had some confusing text: - "No, but only if were optional (I do NOT want it, but others might)" - "Yes, but only if it were optional (I want it, but others might NOT)" The bracket portion of each answer was interpreted as meaning the opposite as the start of each answer :-(. Either way, ~60% are in favour of getting rid of changelogs. IMO this is a BETTER goal than continuing to generate them for rsync, and bike-shedding about what the order should be; and it provides a huge benefit by reducing the size of rsync by 155MiB. Q3: What order should ChangeLog entries be in? ---------------------------------------------- - 85.3% of responses either preferred newest first OR didn't care (incl so as long as the tools work). - 2.9% wanted oldest first. - NOBODY selected "I'd prefer oldest entries first, but do what is best for distribution" - 11.8% said get rid of changelogs. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Infrastructure Lead, Foundation Trustee E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
