You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomcat.apache.org by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> on 2001/08/02 22:23:24 UTC
[VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Christopher Cain at ccain@mhsoftware.com wrote:
> This whole trip is buggin'. I don't personally think it makes logical
> sense to have source in a binary, but I'm not exactly losing sleep over
> it either. I agree with Pier. So Pier, if you would *please* do the
> offical [VOTE] honors with the cute little ballot thingy ...
Me? WTF! :) Ok, will do...
REMEMBER, your vote is useless unless you are a committer on the
jakarta-tomcat project... Those people ARE the following, all at apache.org.
If you're not mentioned here... Pointless to vote...
duncan jon stefano pier costin rubys akv jhunter preston shemnon shachor
bergsten gonzo mode harishp arun craigmcc jluc nacho ariedel horwat remm ed
alex gaburici jiricka pierred glenn larryi arieh hgomez marcsaeg danmil shai
keith kief melaquias amyroh mbraden clucas bip seguin jfclere mmanders andya
REMEMBER: if you vote +1, you take on the responsibility to _DO_ the job,
so, if you voted +1 it's pointless to complain if things don't get done,
since YOU have to do it.
[ ] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do the job]
[ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
[ ] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not binding]
[ ] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
Comments: (required for -1)
____________________________________________________________________________
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by Remy Maucherat <re...@betaversion.org>.
Quoting Remy Maucherat <re...@betaversion.org>:
> > [ ] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do
> the
> > job]
> > [ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
> > [ ] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not
> > binding]
> > [X] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
> >
> > Comments: (required for -1)
>
> The source could encourage people to look at it when they have a
> problem.
> Forcing people to download an additional package would make them (even)
> less
> likely to look at the source.
Change that to -0.
Remy
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by Remy Maucherat <re...@betaversion.org>.
> [ ] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do the
> job]
> [ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
> [ ] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not
> binding]
> [X] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
>
> Comments: (required for -1)
The source could encourage people to look at it when they have a problem.
Forcing people to download an additional package would make them (even) less
likely to look at the source.
Remy
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by jean-frederic clere <jf...@fujitsu-siemens.com>.
[ ] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do the job]
[ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
[X] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not binding]
[ ] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
Well, if in 10 years I have to do some maintenance at a customer it would be
nice to have the sources with the running system. But I am not sure that a
customer will also have the source of his applications...
Cheers
Jean-frederic (jfclere)
Re: Who are those people (Was: [VOTE] Sources in...)
Posted by jean-frederic clere <jf...@fujitsu-siemens.com>.
"Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote:
>
> Christopher Cain at ccain@mhsoftware.com wrote:
> >
> >> duncan jon stefano pier costin rubys akv jhunter preston shemnon shachor
> >> bergsten gonzo mode harishp arun craigmcc jluc nacho ariedel horwat remm ed
> >> alex gaburici jiricka pierred glenn larryi arieh hgomez marcsaeg danmil shai
> >> keith kief melaquias amyroh mbraden clucas bip seguin jfclere mmanders andya
> >
> > Just out of idle curiousity, who are half these people? Okay, not really
> > half, but I don't recognize alot of them. Are some of these people just
> > general Apache/Jakarta bigwigs who get a vote on all subprojects, or are
> > more of them one-time committers who have just moved on?
>
> Some are old developers who moved on to other things in their life, some are
> very bright guys who gave great input in the past and helped us out with
> their guidance (even without committing code), and some... I have no clue
> :-/ Like: who's "Vasile Gaburici"? Never heard of him...
> It should be one of our tasks to keep that list clean, but...
There is a list of committers at http://jakarta.apache.org/site/whoweare.html,
won't be bad to have the "Apache" name there.
>
> Pier
Who are those people (Was: [VOTE] Sources in...)
Posted by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Christopher Cain at ccain@mhsoftware.com wrote:
>
>> duncan jon stefano pier costin rubys akv jhunter preston shemnon shachor
>> bergsten gonzo mode harishp arun craigmcc jluc nacho ariedel horwat remm ed
>> alex gaburici jiricka pierred glenn larryi arieh hgomez marcsaeg danmil shai
>> keith kief melaquias amyroh mbraden clucas bip seguin jfclere mmanders andya
>
> Just out of idle curiousity, who are half these people? Okay, not really
> half, but I don't recognize alot of them. Are some of these people just
> general Apache/Jakarta bigwigs who get a vote on all subprojects, or are
> more of them one-time committers who have just moved on?
Some are old developers who moved on to other things in their life, some are
very bright guys who gave great input in the past and helped us out with
their guidance (even without committing code), and some... I have no clue
:-/ Like: who's "Vasile Gaburici"? Never heard of him...
It should be one of our tasks to keep that list clean, but...
Pier
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions (not a vote, just a question)
Posted by Christopher Cain <cc...@mhsoftware.com>.
"Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote:
>
> If you're not mentioned here... Pointless to vote...
+1 (non-binding)
... just to spite you :-P
(actually, since a +1 means I volunteer to do it, even though I don't
have access to the server I'd be more than happy to crack it and delete
the appropriate tree ;-)
> duncan jon stefano pier costin rubys akv jhunter preston shemnon shachor
> bergsten gonzo mode harishp arun craigmcc jluc nacho ariedel horwat remm ed
> alex gaburici jiricka pierred glenn larryi arieh hgomez marcsaeg danmil shai
> keith kief melaquias amyroh mbraden clucas bip seguin jfclere mmanders andya
Just out of idle curiousity, who are half these people? Okay, not really
half, but I don't recognize alot of them. Are some of these people just
general Apache/Jakarta bigwigs who get a vote on all subprojects, or are
more of them one-time committers who have just moved on?
Also, I agree with you, Pier, on the installer business. I realized that
by replying specifically to Remy's post that it might sound like I had a
problem with separate installers/custom distros (sorry about that Remy
;-). I agree that people should be able to package it up however they
like, and I was only arguing for their removal from the primary bin
tarballs and, by extension, the build process. That way there is at
least ONE way for people to easily grab a bin-only ball. People who run
custom installers (whether Remy's Windoze installer or Henri's RPMs),
OTOH, might very well expect to get the source to be there, and I
certainly think people should have the freedom to build custom
distributions however they like. That's a good catch, Pier, since the
binary balls (hehe) are the only thing the vote applies to.
- Christopher
RE: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by Marc Saegesser <ma...@apropos.com>.
[ ] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do the job]
[ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
[X] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not binding]
[ ] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
Comments: (required for -1)
I really don't see the harm in having the sources in the binary download.
They really aren't *that* big. I can also see some real benefits to having
the source available, especially for nightly builds. The source included in
the binary download is *exactly* the code that was used to build the
release. Nightly builds are only archived for about a week and they aren't
tagged in CVS. To recreate the source for a given nightly build after its
been removed from the archive would require checking out the respository for
the appropriate date. How many people who aren't doing active development
have CVS installed and know how to use it?
That argument may not be all that compelling, but then I don't see the other
side being very compelling either. As general rule, more information is
better than less information.
Marc Saegesser
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Loïc Lefèvre at llefevre@fivia.com wrote:
> I think you don't read ALL the mails you receive, if you look carfully,
> you'll see I wanted to keep the sources in the package...
> The answer I give here is IRONIC ;)
Oh :) Sorry :) My bad this time :) :) :) Yeah, I don't read ALL emails,
especially in this thread that, as I said, it totally pointless... :)
Hm, hint from a long-timer on the Apache projects, never assume ANYONE reads
EVERY-SINGLE piece of email he receives. Most of us are subscribed to A LOT
of MLs to keep track of the different projects, and skim thru messages like
ravens... I've seen people getting 5000 messages and going thru them in
something like two hours - soooo. If there's irony in what you're saying,
usually it's a good common practice to put some :) :) :) here and there...
(especially when you're not dealing with English native speakers, like me :)
Sorry :)
Pier
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Loïc Lefèvre at llefevre@fivia.com wrote:
>
>> Don't even think about a select-choose-submit interface. I swear I'm going
>> to get angry if I see something like it.
>>
> Well perhaps but remember... DOS -> Windows, bash -> KDE...
Perhaps you don't know what we want and we don't want to have on our
servers.
To process one form USUALLY what you need is a script on the server (perl,
servlet, script whatever), not YOU go down and talk to root (Brian), and
tell him to install a script to process a form for downloading Tomcat, and,
(since Brian is way more polite than I am) you won't get flamed, but for
sure it's not going to fly.
Second of all, the script, its configuration or SOMETHING must be changed
every time you roll a release (so, instead of having already to modify a
bazillion of pages - but that's easy thanks to Jon), I also have to modify a
script configuration, to which I probably don't have access to (for good
reasons Brian is paranoid about security - since we were hacked twice in the
last 3 years - and I'm 100% with him). So, every now and then, someone ELSE
needs to do that job for you.
Unless you don't want to have your script to walk a tree and figure it all
out by itself, but if someone changes something in the layout, you're
screwed.
Then, what, are we asking our mirrors to turn on script execution? Nobody
ever thinks that our sites are being mirrored all around the planet, and a
change (such as enabling a script, or using a template language, needs to be
done my 50+ hosts around the globe, 90% of which are unmaintained since
they're only mirrors! :). Like, if my process form is in perl, am I sure
that all mirrors have perl installed?
Other option would be to use JavaScript on the client side, and I bet you to
find a fan of that approach on this mailing list.
Evolution (DOS->WINDOWS, BASH->KDE) might be easy when one individual is
involved, (look, both the examples you made are client-side environments),
but when a change involves several hundreds of them, I'd rather _THINK_
first.
Pier
RE: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by Loïc Lefèvre <ll...@fivia.com>.
It's YOUR point of view... not mine, sorry :(
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Pier P. Fumagalli [mailto:pier@betaversion.org]
> Envoyé : vendredi 3 août 2001 12:02
> À : tomcat-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Objet : Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
>
>
> Loïc Lefèvre at llefevre@fivia.com wrote:
>
> > [X] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do the
job]
> > [ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
> > [ ] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not
binding]
> > [ ] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
> >
> > Comments: (required for -1)
> >
> > Yes, I've changed my mind.
>
> Well... AFAIK it doesn't really matter as you don't have commit access...
>
Thanks to tell me that, I forget I haven't...
>
>
> > But I think, the first thing I would do when I'll look at the source,
(to
> > understand what is done in terms of code, javadoc not clear some
times...) is
> > to unzip the .jar file then use jad to decompile the desired .class (as
I do
> > for the JDK).
>
> SO WHAT'S THE FUCKING POINT OF REMOVING THE SOURCE? TO MAKE YOU USE JAD?
>
> > example:
> > The students who don't have internet at home and must download it at
school
> > for their "study-projects" could be interested to have the source too
(not
> > return to school and download another package)...
>
> Now I don't really get the point of that +1...
I think you don't read ALL the mails you receive, if you look carfully,
you'll see I wanted to keep the sources in the package...
The answer I give here is IRONIC ;)
At the end of this mail is a precedent mail I wrote...
>
> > An other thing could be a more advanced interface to download the tomcat
> > package:
> >
> > Tomcat download:
> >
> > Version [3.2.3 |v] <--- a combo-box
> > Package: (o) bin + source <---
> > ( ) bin <--- some radio
> > ( ) source <--- buttons
> >
> > [Submit]
> >
> > and I will help in the process, meaning do the job, if one want ;)
>
> Don't even think about a select-choose-submit interface. I swear I'm going
> to get angry if I see something like it.
>
> Pier
Well perhaps but remember... DOS -> Windows, bash -> KDE...
Loïc Lefèvre
############################################################################
########
OLD MAIL
############################################################################
########
First, I'm very impressed that someone answer me in this
mailing-list (I mean DEV).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Christopher Cain wrote:
>
>
> Loïc Lefèvre wrote:
> >
> > In my mind, there is one argument to let the source code in the
binaries:
> >
> > "To enhance myself tomcat when nothing else can help you."
>
> That's what the source distribution is for :-)
I know ;), and that's good!
>
> > I (and I'm NOT alone) have encountered many problems using Tomcat and
> > thus there are good answers to good faqs, I had to resolve some
problems...
>
> I'm sorry to hear that your've encountered *many* problems with Tomcat.
> If by problems you mean bugs, I'd be interested in knowing which
> versions you've had difficulties with so that we can address the issues.
My version is: Tomcat 3.2.3 *final* downloaded the day it has been released.
(No previous, no milestone..., just the final one)
> Are we talking about previous milestones, or the more recent betas? Are
> we talking the 3.x branches or 4.0? I know I speak for all Tomcat
> developers when I say that we want to produce the finest server on the
> planet, and if people are having what they consider to be excessive
> problems, then we'd love to hear about it so that we can build a better
> product.
And I report my problems for these reasons!
>
> If you're talking instead about usage and configuration problems, then
> that's a documentation problem on our part. I know the docs are not what
> they could be, or even *should* be, but if you follow the dev list then
> you know that we are working on it. I think you'll see a vastly improved
> documentation bundle for both branches in the next few months. Just hang
> in there ;-)
Yes I've encoutered configuration problems, one week spent to finally see
that my WEB-INF directory (I developp under windows NT and test under linux)
were Web-inf in windows explorer but web-inf under DOS! So when deploying,
under linux (which is case sensitiv) nothing worked. I think a little
remark in the doc could help ;)
>
> > (and I've got some not resolved...)
>
> If you mean bugs, then I hope you're reporting them in Bugzilla, right?
Hemm no, here and in user mailing-list, I don't know the process to report
bugs
on Bugzilla nor have the time (for now, I have to migrate from JServ to
Tomcat
and I've already spent two weeks...).
In fact, I've been on the bug report page (tomcat one) but found the web
interface
very complex (I'm french and a "bugreport.html.fr" could be great ;))
The last bug I have is about cookies, I've got 4 pictures describing the
HTTP-packets
I receive and send under Apache JServ and Tomcat and strangely:
- Under JServ:
- I receive cookies
- I can send these cookies
- Under Tomcat:
- I receive 2 cookies (header Set-Cookie + Set-Cookie2)
- I (my browser, IE 5.0) don't send any cookie.
Session tracking doesn't work :((((((((((((((((((((((((((.............
If you want, I can send you these pictures to see by yourself.
Is that a bug (Tomcat don't write correctly the cookies) or a configuration
problem
(IE doesn't support Set-Cookie2? and I have to upgrade to 5.5 or 6beta) I
don't know.
>
> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/index.html
>
Thanks for the url :)
> > and without the sources I would not have choose Tomcat...
> > Consider I'm a developper responsible of the migration from Apache JServ
> > to Tomcat, there are 9 other people who will hear about tomcat... so now
> > Imagine:
> >
> > me -> 9
> > 10 -> 90
> > 100 -> 900!!!
> >
> > and I work in a little enterprise!
> > So think about it...
>
> I don't think you'll get any arguments here, on an Open Source developer
> list, about the importance of having the source code available. I just
> don't think that anyone is well-served by having the source code crammed
> down their throats. Some people believe in Open Source, and they like
> the fact that it is available for review if something should arise, but
> they aren't necessarily interested in having it forced on them. If they
> chose to downloaded the binary release, with the link to the source
> release right beside it, then they obviously didn't necessarily want the
> source code at this time. If they want to at any future time, there's
> little chance they don't know where it can be had. I just think it's
> rude to include the entire source tree when someone explicitly chose the
> binaries, since they obviously had their reasons from not clicking on
> the source link.
I agree but I thought about advertisment here and the more people would be
informed about Tomcat Open source devloppment the more there will be
devlopper
to work... if for these 900 people, 10 decide to join the jakarta project,
I think it's better than nothing ;)
>
> In any case, I'm glad to hear that you recommend Tomcat, and I hope that
> you'll see most of your problems resolved in the coming months. With a
> vastly improved documenatation bundle, and with both trees closing in on
> an official release, I think the future looks bright indeed!
>
> Regards,
>
> Christopher
I think the future is brighter than you say...
Regards too,
Loïc Lefèvre
note: The problem I resolved were (I don't know...) RedirectMatch rule under
Apache
1.3.12 + mod_rewrite module, you can look at:
http://mikal.org/interests/java/tomcat/archive/view?mesg=37135
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Loïc Lefèvre at llefevre@fivia.com wrote:
> [X] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do the job]
> [ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
> [ ] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not binding]
> [ ] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
>
> Comments: (required for -1)
>
> Yes, I've changed my mind.
Well... AFAIK it doesn't really matter as you don't have commit access...
> But I think, the first thing I would do when I'll look at the source, (to
> understand what is done in terms of code, javadoc not clear some times...) is
> to unzip the .jar file then use jad to decompile the desired .class (as I do
> for the JDK).
SO WHAT'S THE FUCKING POINT OF REMOVING THE SOURCE? TO MAKE YOU USE JAD?
> example:
> The students who don't have internet at home and must download it at school
> for their "study-projects" could be interested to have the source too (not
> return to school and download another package)...
Now I don't really get the point of that +1...
> An other thing could be a more advanced interface to download the tomcat
> package:
>
> Tomcat download:
>
> Version [3.2.3 |v] <--- a combo-box
> Package: (o) bin + source <---
> ( ) bin <--- some radio
> ( ) source <--- buttons
>
> [Submit]
>
> and I will help in the process, meaning do the job, if one want ;)
Don't even think about a select-choose-submit interface. I swear I'm going
to get angry if I see something like it.
Pier
RE: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by Loïc Lefèvre <ll...@fivia.com>.
[X] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do the job]
[ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
[ ] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not binding]
[ ] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
Comments: (required for -1)
Yes, I've changed my mind.
But I think, the first thing I would do when I'll look at the source,
(to understand what is done in terms of code, javadoc not clear some
times...)
is to unzip the .jar file then use jad to decompile the desired .class (as I
do for the JDK).
example:
The students who don't have internet at home and must download it at school
for their "study-projects" could be interested to have the source too (not
return to school
and download another package)...
An other thing could be a more advanced interface to download the tomcat
package:
Tomcat download:
Version [3.2.3 |v] <--- a combo-box
Package: (o) bin + source <---
( ) bin <--- some radio
( ) source <--- buttons
[Submit]
and I will help in the process, meaning do the job, if one want ;)
Loïc Lefèvre
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Paul Speed at pspeed@progeeks.com wrote:
>
> As another example, I've never tried to compile the JDK .java sources,
> but I always have at least a few of the files loaded into my editor at
> any given time.
That's a nice point :) I check out the JDK sources at least 3 times/day...
But never built it...
Pier
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by Paul Speed <ps...@progeeks.com>.
Christopher Cain wrote:
>
> Paul Speed wrote:
> >
> > I personally don't understand what the big deal is. Some people
> > want a binary only distribution, some want a binary+source
> > distribution. Why not provide both? (Easy for me to say as a
> > lurker.)
>
> ... and some of us want only source, and we'll build the binaries
> ourself ;-)
>
> > For what it's worth, I would only download the bin+src distro, ie:
> > the same one that's misnamed now.
>
> I'm not arguing anything with you here, I'm just genuinely curious. Why
> do you prefer to have the binaries with your source? Is it because you
> don't want to hassle with the build process? Again, I'm not making fun
> or arguing, I'm legitimately curious. Actually, if Tomcat wanted to be a
> trend-setter (as I don't know of any other project that does it,
> although that doesn't necessarily mean they aren't out there), I
> wouldn't have any objections with the three options: Binary only, Source
> only, Binary+Source. Of course, I'm not the one who would have to do all
> of the releases, including milestones, betas, and finals (not yet,
> anyway ;-), so that's easy for me to say ... but I wouldn't have a
> conceptual argument against it. Choices are good!
I download the binaries because I don't want to have to mess with
building unless I absolutely have to. Despite the problems we hear,
tomcat is pretty easy to get setup right out of the box.
However, during normal development I often work on a lot of <ahem>
bleeding edge tag libraries, etc.. When I have problems, it's nice
to be able to go looking through the source to see whose fault it
is or just for more information about what is expected of my code.
As another example, I've never tried to compile the JDK .java sources,
but I always have at least a few of the files loaded into my editor at
any given time.
-Paul Speed
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by Christopher Cain <cc...@mhsoftware.com>.
Paul Speed wrote:
>
> I personally don't understand what the big deal is. Some people
> want a binary only distribution, some want a binary+source
> distribution. Why not provide both? (Easy for me to say as a
> lurker.)
... and some of us want only source, and we'll build the binaries
ourself ;-)
> For what it's worth, I would only download the bin+src distro, ie:
> the same one that's misnamed now.
I'm not arguing anything with you here, I'm just genuinely curious. Why
do you prefer to have the binaries with your source? Is it because you
don't want to hassle with the build process? Again, I'm not making fun
or arguing, I'm legitimately curious. Actually, if Tomcat wanted to be a
trend-setter (as I don't know of any other project that does it,
although that doesn't necessarily mean they aren't out there), I
wouldn't have any objections with the three options: Binary only, Source
only, Binary+Source. Of course, I'm not the one who would have to do all
of the releases, including milestones, betas, and finals (not yet,
anyway ;-), so that's easy for me to say ... but I wouldn't have a
conceptual argument against it. Choices are good!
- Christopher
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Paul Speed at pspeed@progeeks.com wrote:
>
> Everyone who? jakarta/apache? I would agree with that.
Since I've been on the ASF, all project I saw always included SRCs in BINs
(now, someone of us might not do it, but that's not a project I use, then).
Discussion pointless... Clogging my inbox when there is so much shit to take
care of before thinking about the rafinate sense of building the perfect
distro...
If I sum up the time wasted on this by all who wrote, and convert it in code
lines for (who knows, maybe organizing mirrors better) we would be mirrored
on at least 90 planets by now.
Pier
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by Paul Speed <ps...@progeeks.com>.
"Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote:
>
> Pier P. Fumagalli at pier@betaversion.org wrote:
> >
> > [ ] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do the job]
> > [ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
> > [X] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not binding]
> > [ ] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
> >
> > Comments: (required for -1)
>
> It's a totally pointless discussion... Everyone always included sources in
> binary distros...
Everyone who? jakarta/apache? I would agree with that. Other
projects seem to name binary and source distributions appropriately.
I would at the very least argue that the name "binary distro" is
wrong.
> So, I'm for the peace and quiet and leave things as are
> now. But, since I'm a nice guy, I don't make it pending...
> (Pointless to overiterate on the advantages to see the sources with the
> binaries, like the same .class and .java files all toghether..
> Yadayadayada). But I'm just wasting bandwidth (like the rest of this
> thread!)
>
> On a sidenote... If we have an installer (like under Windows) I vote -1 for
> removing sources from that, and make it an optional component. So, my -0 is
> only for tarballs/zipballs (balls!) bah! (Go Remy!)
>
> Pier
I personally don't understand what the big deal is. Some people
want a binary only distribution, some want a binary+source
distribution. Why not provide both? (Easy for me to say as a
lurker.)
For what it's worth, I would only download the bin+src distro, ie:
the same one that's misnamed now.
-Paul Speed
Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
Posted by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Pier P. Fumagalli at pier@betaversion.org wrote:
>
> [ ] - +1 Remove the sources [I will help in the process, meaning do the job]
> [ ] - +0 Remove the sources [I can't help, won't help]
> [X] - -0 Leave the sources [But since I don't volunteer this is not binding]
> [ ] - -1 Are you nuts? Sources are there and there have to remain.
>
> Comments: (required for -1)
It's a totally pointless discussion... Everyone always included sources in
binary distros... So, I'm for the peace and quiet and leave things as are
now. But, since I'm a nice guy, I don't make it pending...
(Pointless to overiterate on the advantages to see the sources with the
binaries, like the same .class and .java files all toghether..
Yadayadayada). But I'm just wasting bandwidth (like the rest of this
thread!)
On a sidenote... If we have an installer (like under Windows) I vote -1 for
removing sources from that, and make it an optional component. So, my -0 is
only for tarballs/zipballs (balls!) bah! (Go Remy!)
Pier