Why not have three different downloads? src, bin, and src + bin.
(ie: can't we all just get along? ;) )
-Paul Speed
"Rob S." wrote:
>
> So what we have here is a minority of developers who look through the Tomcat
> source, versus the majority of people who have no interest in the /src dir.
> The argument is "leave src in there so that when I want to look at the
> source, i don't have to download a src dist".
>
> For some reason, the "keep it in there" argument almost makes it sounds like
> the src is unavailable unless it's in the bin build. Personally, for all of
> the 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, August 02, 2001 12:10 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Sources in Binary Distributions
> >
> >
> > Absolutely agree with you!
> >
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : Arun Katkere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Envoyé : jeudi 2 août 2001 17:28
> > À : '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Objet : RE: Sources in Binary Distributions
> >
> >
> > I don't generally throw in my $0.02 into a well worn thread and add to the
> > noise , but there is another issue which I didn't see anyone bring up.
> >
> > Having source around helps you with debugging. And if that
> > results in better
> > bug reports, i.e., instead of "it doesn't work and here is the
> > stack trace",
> > you get "it doesn't work because you didn't check for null around
> > this line
> > of this file", it is probably worth it. Keep in mind that many of Tomcat
> > users are competent Java developers. And we are not talking about
> > the entire
> > build system here. Just the basic .java files. Not even native components
> > (which don't aid in this purpose). Sun's Java2 SDK includes the
> > source (just
> > the .java files) for I suspect the same reason.
> >
> > Personally, I download the source distribution only when there is
> > a critical
> > issue in Tomcat that we need resolved now, and patch and build with that
> > fix. Source in the binary on the other hand is useful for many
> > reasons even
> > if you discount the "first step towards getting people involved"
> > argument. A
> > quick check of some aspect of servlet/JSP spec(without going
> > through 100s of
> > pages of PDF). Help quickly identify whether the issue is with Tomcat or
> > your code. All on machines where you typically don't have the full
> > development environment set up (when we are talking about JSP and not
> > servlets).
> >
> > Of course, one can always download the "source distribution". So,
> > if you are
> > set 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]
> > > Subject: RE: Sources in Binary Distributions
> > >
> > >
> > > > 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: )
> > >
> > > So you *expect* the /src dir in a binary dist? That's
> > > mind-blowing to me.
> > > If you're interested in TC development, your first thought
> > > isn't "Time to go
> > > d/l the src distro" it's "Time to d/l the bin dist so I can
> > > check out the
> > > src" ?
> > >
> > > I'm not making a huge stand here, I thought bringing up the
> > > suggestion was
> > > almost common sense. It's a "bin" dist, i.e. !(src
> > > included). I wouldn't
> > > expect it to be there <shrug>
> > >
> > > - r
> > >
> >
> >
