[Yum] Gziped headers patch

[Konstantin Riabitsev]

On Sat, 2002-06-15 at 18:04, seth vidal wrote:
> So I was thinking some more about how to handle the compressed headers
> to not break the current people using it until they get a new client
> which supports patched headers.

How about instead of trying to preserve compatibility with un-gzipped
headers we just drop it and go directly with gzipped ones. I mean, I
realize that we will break the existing installations for, what is it, 5
people, but even then all they will have to do is to rm -rf a couple of
directories and do a "yum update" to get the gzipped headers. There are
a few people using the dulug tree, but as you had mentioned, it's
"experimental", so if stuff breaks we won't even have to feel guilty
about it.

I just want to adhere to the "KISS" priciple, and currently it tells me
that we don't want to introduce unnecessary complexities. I say let's
gzip all headers and basta. :)

What do you all think?

-- 
 0>  Konstantin ("Icon") Riabitsev
/ )  Duke University Physics Sysadmin
 ~   www.phy.duke.edu/~icon/pubkey.asc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 240 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.baseurl.org/pipermail/yum/attachments/20020615/53a3006d/attachment-0001.pgp