>
>Jean-frederic wrote :
>
>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...
That's all the power of packaging method like RPM,
s
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 1:18 AM
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: Re: Sources in Binary Distributions
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Christopher Cain wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On
697ECEDD...oOOo..(_)..oOOo...
PGP Fingerprint : 9DF8 1EA8 ED53 2F39 DC9B 904A 364F 80E6
>-Original Message-
>From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 1:18 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Sources in Binary Distributions
The *only* reason I brought this up in the first place was because I thought
it was an oversight in the build process. "The *source* in the *bin* build
I downloaded doesn't seem right..." - what the good Mr. Cain had previously
stated. If it WAS just a mere oversight, we can shave some time and
c Lefèvre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 12:10 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Sources in Binary Distributions
> >
> >
> > Absolutely agree with you!
> >
> > -Message d'origine-
> > De : Arun Ka
I also plan to leave the source code in the Windows installer distribution,
since IMO it's supposed to be a comprehensive "all-in-one" download. The source
code is not installed by default.
Remy
ing? Certainly not, so don't
take it so personally. We're all bootylicious here, my man ... ease up a
bit :-)
- Christopher
> > -----Original Message-
> > From: Rob S. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 9:39 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PR
Quoting Remy Maucherat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > [ ] - +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 n
Loïc Lefèvre at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
[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 f
It's YOUR point of view... not mine, sorry :(
> -Message d'origine-
> De : Pier P. Fumagalli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Envoyé : vendredi 3 août 2001 12:02
> À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Objet : Re: [VOTE] Sources in Binary Distributions
>
>
> Loïc
Loïc Lefèvre at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 ther
[ ] - +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'd like to second that. I am currently not involved in any active
development, but looking at sources contained in a binary dist is
certainly the first step towards getting involved (its on my list (o: )
cheers
dim
Fabien Le Floc'h wrote:
>
> As a tomcat user, I am not so enthousiast about y
> -Original Message-
> From: Pier P. Fumagalli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> [...]
>
> [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
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
binarie
Paul Speed at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
-Original Message-
> > From: Christopher Cain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 12:47 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Sources in Binary Distributions
> >
> >
> > Rob doesn't need me to defend him ..
Pier P. Fumagalli at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 a
Paul Speed at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 whe
"Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote:
>
> Pier P. Fumagalli at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 bind
people that could care less about the source, I don't
> think it's asking
> much for people who want to look at the source to go and get it...?
>
> - r
>
> > -Original Message-----
> > From: Loïc Lefèvre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday,
on saving folks a few seconds (or minutes) of download time at a slight
cost for those of us who do find it invaluable, that's fine.
-arun
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob S. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 4:19 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Fabien Le Floc'h wrote:
>
> As a tomcat user, I am not so enthousiast about your idea of removing the sources
>from the binaries.
>
> Almost every user download only the binaries. Having the sources inside means
>bringing more developers to the Tomcat project, just because it will be easier to
Quoting Fabien Le Floc'h <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> As a tomcat user, I am not so enthousiast about your idea of removing
> the sources from the binaries.
>
> Almost every user download only the binaries. Having the sources inside
> means bringing more developers to the Tomcat project, just because
As a tomcat user, I am not so enthousiast about your idea of removing the sources from
the binaries.
Almost every user download only the binaries. Having the sources inside means bringing
more developers to the Tomcat project, just because it will be easier to take a look
at the sources (since
> For Tomcat 4, what do folks think of omitting the sources from the binary
> distribution? This would knock the size of the binary distributions down
> by around 2 megabytes (which I'm sure people would also appreciate).
...exactly why I emailed about it in the first place =) I have an old
lap
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> >[...]
> > For Tomcat 4, what do folks think of omitting the sources
> from the binary
> > distribution? This would knock the size of the binary
> distributions down
> > by around 2 megabytes (which
Bip Thelin wrote:
>
> ...
> And also update the build.xml to omitt the sources when compiling with
> target dist.
LOL! Idea Thief!!! ;-)
(j/k)
> -Original Message-
> From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> [...]
> Well, "ant dist" ***is*** how binary distributions (for both the nightly
> builds and releases) are created, so this should not be too much of a
> surprise :-).
Oups, ignore my last post.
..b
> -Original Message-
> From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>[...]
> For Tomcat 4, what do folks think of omitting the sources from the binary
> distribution? This would knock the size of the binary distributions down
> by around 2 megabytes (which I'm sure people would
On Fri, 27 Jul 2001, Christopher Cain wrote:
>
> On a related topic, I was a little surprised to find a source directory
> in my "dist" build.
Well, "ant dist" ***is*** how binary distributions (for both the nightly
builds and releases) are created, so this should not be too much of a
surpris
"Craig R. McClanahan" wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> For Tomcat 4, what do folks think of omitting the sources from the binary
> distribution? This would knock the size of the binary distributions down
> by around 2 megabytes (which I'm sure people would also appreciate).
FWIW, I completely agree. I a
By habit (since before my time on Tomcat :-), we have shipped the source
code (although not in a directly buildable arrangement) inside the binary
distributions of Tomcat. This is certainly nice for people that want to
look around and see how Tomcat works, but it is somewhat redundant since
we ma
34 matches
Mail list logo
