On 15/01/2010 14:41, Rainer Jung wrote: > On 14.01.2010 21:21, ma...@apache.org wrote: >> Author: markt >> Date: Thu Jan 14 20:21:23 2010 >> New Revision: 899395 >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=899395&view=rev >> Log: >> zip is for non-windows platforms > > Hmmm, really?
I believe so yes. Going back to the original thread [1] it was for platforms with limited default tar implementations (like Solaris). > Until recently we didn't have the individual binary release zips for > Windows, they are new. Previously the zip was for DOS/Windows. > > If we encode the package-zip now for Unix, don't we create confusion > w.r.t. package-src-zip (DOS) and package-deployer-zip (undefined until > now)? I share those concerns but in the end decided to change to LF for .zip. If windows users do download it, it will still work (.bat & .sh are always platform specific in the distros) but they won't be able to use notepad to edit the config files. There are plenty of alternatives. Or they can download the windows binary. It was close call and I'm only just in favour of using LF in .zip so if the consensus is to use CRLF I'm fine with that too. > I'd prefer keep the package-zip with CRLF (and ensure CRLF in > package-deployer-zip too). That probably needs another patch. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
