Am 17.05.2011 um 15:34 schrieb Simon Sawatzki:
> Hi again,
> I don't understand what's wrong with cross-compiling and having it done by someone new. Are you afraid of new team members who might eventually be involved in decisions?
No, not at all. But the Windows port is going to be downloaded by thousands of people. All these people are putting a lot of trust into us. Hence, it seems unwise to let it be made by a person we do not yet know and hence obviously cannot yet fully trust. It's as simple as that. Nothing personal.
Establishing trust takes some time, which we don't have until 1.3.0 -- but before the next release, there is plenty of time to get to now new people, and we'll be happy to do it.
> I think it would be nice to have a daily/nightly build again for Win32.
We do have those, as you point out yourself, on buildbot. Certainly not in a perfect form right now, though, but this is being worked on.
> The problem with buildbot is that the binaries are very large - 80 MB per file is quite much if you have a traffic limit like I do have with my internet connection.
Not sure were you got that number from. The latest win32 buildbot binary is 31 MB, the win64 one 64 MB.
> Thus the binaries should be stripped with "strip scummvm.exe".
On other systems, we explicitly do *not* want to strip the binary in order to not loose the ability to get a backtrace in case ScummVM crashes (e.g. on Mac OS X, if an app crashes, the system will, if configured accordingly automatically pop up a window that allows you get a crash report, including a backtrace, that can then be mailed to the developer).
If there is no reasonable way under windows to get to such a backtrace, then (assuming I forgot nothing else) we should indeed strip the daily builds for Windows.
> My friend is already capable of doing it with his cross-compiled bundle.
> But maybe someone could set up the buildbot to do the stripping itself and then link to the build on the download page?
Sure, that would be trivial to arrange. If somebody confirms that we can't make good of the debug symbols in the Windows builds, I can arrange that at any time.
> Though we would still have the installer missing this way.
Yeah, which is why this should be setup on buildbot ASAP. Here, too, I am happy to help with.
> If Filippos is doing the offcial release compiling this time, then fine by me.
> I just think that the nightly build should not die because of bureaucratics and long argumentation for and against it.
To the contrary, since one of the main reasons for the arguments is gone, finally we are free to setup a reproducible automated daily build that can be understood, verified, modified, tweaked, improved, tested, etc. by multiple team members. It's been forced upon us to do this sooner than desired, and in a way that nobody is really happy about. But IMHO it's good that at least we can now move forward, instead of stupid bickering over a no-brainer improvement.
Of course that's just *my* opinion, and I am certainly biased.
> After all, how should someone gain your trust if you don't give him the chance to gain your trust? (This logic sounds rather women-like to me. :) )
As I mentioned, we'll be happy to evolve a trust relationship, but obviously that needs time. You wouldn't hand your bank account and pin over to somebody you never met before just because he's a friend's friend, would you?