httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <...@jaguNET.com>
Subject Re: Binary tarballs
Date Thu, 08 Oct 1998 19:40:08 GMT
Wilfredo Sanchez wrote:
> 
> | I think that including source is in keeping with the spirit of
> | Open Source. Also, it allows those with binary builds to change it
> | as needed without needing to download the source.
> 
> Those of us downloading several architectures' of binaries don't really need
> several copies fo the source. Making the source available is in keeping with
> Open Source. Shoving it into the binary download is of little use for most
> people who download binaries.
> 

Except that there is a one-for-one link between the binary and the
_exact_ source used to generate it. By bundling both you are basically
ensuring the receiver that the binary was built from _that_ source.
Ok, "ensure" is too strong a word, but it does increase the confidence
factor.

We need to recall that providing the binaries are a "extra service."
We do that to be nice. Our real focus is the source. We also do it for
those who are unable or "scared" to compile the source for themselves, and
including the source, at the very least, is a subtle reminder that the
code is right there to look through :)

-- 
===========================================================================
   Jim Jagielski   |||   jim@jaguNET.com   |||   http://www.jaguNET.com/
            "That's no ordinary rabbit... that's the most foul,
            cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever laid eyes on"

Mime
View raw message