Re: [Bug-gnubg] Source tarballs on gnubg.org

[Christian Anthon]

There is no reason to keep more than a few tarballs in my opinion. People with very specific needs are better of using cvs anyway.

Christian.

On Jan 2, 2008 1:01 PM, Massimiliano Maini < address@hidden> wrote:

Jonathan Kinsey <address@hidden> wrote on 02/01/2008 12:42:16:

> Massimiliano Maini wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > at the address http://www.gnubg.org/media/sources/ you will see that
> > some tarballs are empty/broken:
> >
> > 20071128-20071204, 20080101                         : size is 0
> > 20071220, 20071231 and 20080101                        : size is smaller
> > than expected (archive is truncated)
> >
> > Any idea ? Running out of space ?
>
> Sounds like a good guess.  There are far too many versions there,
> maybe only the
> last few should be kept?
>
> Jon

I wouldn't complain if past months were represented only by the tarball of the very last
day of the month. If I build an d publish from a given timestamp, I'll take care to make
the corresopnding tarball available.

Anyway, I've removed a few old setup archives to free some space, but it won't last long
at 15Mb per day.

MaX.
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg