Re: emacs-20101122 windows binaries

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 22:33:04 +0100
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> >> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
> >> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 22:10:59 +0100
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> >> >> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
> >> >> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 21:57:39 +0100
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> >> >> >> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@gmail.com>
> >> >> >> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 20:56:11 +0100
> >> >> >> Cc: sean.sieger@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > Because it's pointless.  If we want to give users release binaries
> >> >> >> >> > with debug info, we should just ship such a binary, period.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Please explain why you think that.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I just did, above.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> In what way is "pointless" an explanation?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I meant the second sentence.
> >> >>
> >> >> Can you then explain if you think there is any reason not to ship the
> >> >> release binaries with debug info?
> >> >
> >> > I said it is slightly better, that's all.  The reason is disk space,
> >> > of course: 30MB is a lot for a binary.
> >>
> >> Why do you then think it is pointless to ship both binaries with debug
> >> info and without it?
> >
> > It should be clear: it's even more disk space waste.
> 
> Why do you think that giving the users the choice to download either
> binaries with debug info or without it is "even more disk space
> waste"?

Having both binaries in the same zip archive doesn't give users more
choice.