httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: Source in .msi packages
Date Wed, 05 Dec 2001 16:52:56 GMT
From: "Rodent of Unusual Size" <Ken.Coar@Golux.Com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 7:08 AM


> > No, it was a majority decision...
> 
> Ah, I must have missed it in the thousands of dev messages
> I read (caught up on) in the last few weeks..

I meant to say [to be absolutely clear] that the decision was unilateral
due to the two 'majority scenarios' below, the interest in conserving
absolutely wasted collab donated bandwidth [not to mention our mirror
friends], and the last bugaboo I discovered.

Consider yours to be the first comment in several months even _noticing_
the change...

> > ...the majority decision saiz that 99% of win32 users never owned
> > or installed a compiler.  The other majority decision says that Unix
> > packages never contain the source tree.

I assert both are true.  I'll give you 5% have compilers [it is a open
source project, so perhaps a higher % of users will be code hackers.]

> Can you point me to a subject or message ID or something so
> I can re-read the thread?

If you review the httpd-win32-msi tree, you will see my [sometimes brief]
comments in the history of that package.

I first normalized the apache 2.0 package.  Discovered the old cruft just
simply doesn't work.  We don't have the target-within-source-tree structure
of 1.3 going forward to 2.0.  And that structure was simply, wrong.

So I started to look at how we distribute source in other binary packages.
While reviewing those changes to the 2.0 package, I looked at how we
package both 1.3 and 2.0 on Unix.  And I discovered that the inclusion of
the src tree was relatively non-existant.  The unix httpd binaries were
just that (binary).

In the meantime I've become very proficient at quickly whipping out a
source package, and since alphas have been source only - we've had 2.0.x
Windows .zip tarballs that include the .mak files (which were pulled from
cvs because their version history was worthless, and the .dsp files are
actually legible to even diehard unix hackers.  Disgusting to some, perhaps,
but at least legible.)

So the windows hacker is not left out, in fact they never need to load a
binary install to get clean sources.  The typical user isn't left out, they 
have the binary .msi and now an .exe installer [in case .msi isn't installed 
on their system.]

And those with both requirements aren't left out - they do the same as any
unix admin who wants sources and the binaries, grab 'em both.

There is no way to continue to proliferate this.  Easier to change
expectations now, than to continue the old src/no_src only to cut it off
as of Apache 2.0 GA Release.

Bill



Mime
View raw message