On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 15:47:22 -0500 Mike Frysinger <vapier@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > As a project downstream from xz, if we must have yet another > > compression format independent of gzip, why not let it live along > > side the established one(s) until pretty much anything that links > > to zlib or similar also supports xz? > this makes no sense at all. by your logic, zlib/gzip should support > every single compression that someone might use. No. By my logic, if you're going to replace gzip, you should augment the library to permit backwards compatibility. If you're going to offer xz files, you shouldn't stop offering gz files until no one cares. By my lights, xz offers far too little benefit to warrant the disruption that ensues from dropping gzip. I don't care about "every compression someone might use". Practically every project has provided files in .tar.gz format for over 10 years. Its popularity and dominance, as well as the fact that GNU projects are considering dropping gzip in favor of xz, both indicate that it warrants special consideration. Do you have a coherent argument to the contrary? --jkl _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
