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 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
