On 6/26/05, Oliver Rossmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Craig McClanahan wrote: > > >On 6/24/05, James Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>Wrom: SZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTFJMVRESKPNKMBIPBARHDMN > >>To: "MyFaces Development" <[email protected]> > >>Sent: Friday, June 24, 2005 10:08 PM > >>Subject: Re: Proposal: Elimiante jar files from SVN > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>James Mitchell wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>Unless I missed it somewhere, no one has mentioned the extra bloat in > >>>>your source distributions (if you include the binary dependencies). > >>>> > >>>> > >>>James, > >>> > >>>you need the binary dependencies anyway to build the project, so what is > >>>your point? You download the source distribution with libs included or > >>>you download the source distribution without libs and ant does the lib > >>>download afterwards. The sum of required network traffic is the same. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>That's true for the developer. But I was also considering ASF hardware and > >>bandwidth. Again, that's a drop in the bucket if only MyFaces were doing > >>it. But you are not. I have had this same conversation (beating the same > >>dead horse) with developers on other projects, both here, sf.net, and many, > >>MANY closed source projects. > >> > >> > > > >To reinforce this point, even though *you* (someone downloading the > >CVS or SVN sources of a project) does not pay for the network > >bandwidth, the ASF *does* pay for it. I'd rather see that money > >supporting more users, rather than downloading zillions of copies of > >the same JAR files. > > > > > Craig, > > just for the record: my ISP does not give me internet access for free so > of course I'm paying for the network bandwidth, too. But that's not the > main topic. What's the topic is that I can't see the difference between > > - check out the required libraries together with the project sources > from SVN > > and > > - check out the project sources without required libraries from SVN and > afterwards call an ant target to download the required libs from some > apache jar repository. > > If you ask me the difference in network traffic between the two > scnearios is close to zero as the required jars have to be transfered to > my local hard disk anyway, so what's your point? >
The point is very simple ... who is paying for it? In the "checked into the repository" case, it is *always* Apache that is paying for it, because access to the repository servers is not mirrored. In the "get it from some binary repository" case, the vast majority of the time you will be getting it from some site that is themselves donating bandwidth to support Apache (by being a mirror), but the costs are not borne by the Apache Software Foundation directly. > And if I'm informed correctly in case a new version of a required lib is > needed SVN is even more efficent than the solution you propose: SVN will > just transfer the diffs between the two binaries like rsync does, but > with your solution ant has to download the complete jar. > > By the way, discussing ASF's infrastructure costs will lead to nothing, > don't you think? If you believe that, we have nothing further to talk about, so I'll just delete the rest of your message and reply now. Craig
