bazaar 1.0rc3 (final candidate)

[Matt Nordhoff]

John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> Well, if you do that, why not LZMA compressed, which is usually even better.

Fine by me! :-D How does RAR do?

> I think the biggest reason is that .bz2 isn't usually sufficiently better than
> .gz to justify itself. I know for a long time there were platforms that didn't
> have bz2 well integrated with tar, or that different platforms were different.
> (I think Red Hat was -I, others were -j, etc.)

Is that really a problem anymore? Heck, you require Python 2.4, so
requiring a version of tar from this century wouldn't be so bad. And
those users would likely have learned how to use bzip2 anyway.

> Anyway, it seems okay to create a .bz2. But I'm not sure that it is really
> worthwhile.
> 
> For Windows, at least, using 7zip to generate a self-extracting LZMA compressed
> stream can be a big benefit. I've seen it do wonders on pre-compiled Boost
> libraries (but that is because all the template code probably is repeated in
> every lib, and boost builds about 4 variants based on different compiler
> settings [threading, debug, etc]).

You're right that .bz2 isn't really worthwhile. When I checked the
difference and realized how small the gain was, I almost didn't sent the
mail.

(I mean that providing both .gz and .bz2 isn't worthwhile. I think
providing only .bz2 could be OK, but not really worth the effort to switch.)
--