[Bug 175433] Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: tor - Anonymizing overlay network for TCP (The onion router)


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175433





------- Additional Comments From enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de  2006-09-21 14:12 EST -------
> - We've never had a policy for systematically splitting packages

Exactly, there is no policy which says when to split a package. Until
then, it is packager's choice whether he splits or does not split.

My choice is, to split.


> - If we were to use your strict splitting policy on all Fedora packages,
>   the total number of packages in Fedora would be multiplied by 3 or
>   4. There's an inherent cost associated with increasing the number of
>   packages at the yum/rpm level.

Is this cost measured in KB, seconds, used lines on display or
bananas? Wouldn't they be outweighted by lesser dependencies and a
smaller system?

E.g. monolithic 'tor' might bring in initscripts, lvm2, udev... while
a splitted tor brings only tor-core. Splitting seems to reduce inherent
costs on yum/rpm level for me...

Splitting will perhaps increase needed blocksize (1-4K) in the repository
by one or two. The Used diskspace on the repository is cheap. Much cheaper
than the bloat introduced by unneeded dependencies.


> - Simplicity. Keep It Simple.

Ok, I can remove the initscript stuff completely and provide single
'tor-lsb' and 'tor-initng' packages. Would just add two more reviews
and people would complain that 'tor' main package does not have an
initscript.

As a compromise: I will keep -lsb in main package (as is) and remove
only the -minit and -initng part. Would you accept this?


> - Consistency to me is an important issue.

What would bring you consistency here? Using 'yum install tor' installs
consistently a 'tor' daemon with the appropriate initscripts; both with
the splitted and bloated variant.


> Consistency across other distributions for second. 

Package is for Fedora Extras; I do not request a review for Debian or
Mandriva.


> Not even 2M in size.

Size of package does not matter for dependencies issues. A 20 byte
perl script can bring in 50 MB of perl.


> - Your refusal to collaborate with reviewers is hurting Fedora.

Come on. Your refusal to accept views of packagers is hurting Fedora.


=========


> 1) most, if not all other packages work like that.

In Germany we have a proverb: "millions of flies can not err: shit
tastes great".

When you are new it might be good idea to follow the masses. But at
some time you should turn on the brain and think yourself.


> 2) you are insisting on custom non-FE requirements

Ok, as written above, I will remove the -initng and -minit subpackage
when this helps.




I really do not want to continue this meta-discussion which consists
only of personal views and unproved statements like "entire community".


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.