Disclaimer: I am not an official or a manager for the 4K Competition. The statements contained herein are my opinion or the (possibly mis)quoted opinions of other forum members.
There's been some discussion about the legality of using Pack200 as a mechanism to save space. We all know that the <a href="http://www.java-gaming.org/forums/index.php?topic=15431.msg122906#msg122906
">official list of rules</a> has one item that clearly and unambiguously states "No Pack200", In addition, the forum topic <a href="http://www.java-gaming.org/forums/index.php?topic=14771.0
">Important: NO PACK200</a> states that this restriction is due to the fact that that not all members will be able to either find a webhost that supports Pack200 or be able to configure their own webhost to support Pack200, and that allowing it might give those members who have a suitable webhost an unfair advantage. The specific wording is:
I'm not sure how many of the pack200 advocates out there truly understand the nature of the beast. Pack200 is NOT just another button you can press in your eclipse configuration and ta-da your JAR is smaller. Pack200 relies on server-side configurations. While there are many of you who are willing to jump through all of the hoops it takes to get pack200 working correctly, most people won't. If we allowed pack200, there would be a severe advantage to people who have the benefit of having a server customized enough to handle pack200. There are still people who can barely get their webhost to launch JNLPs with the correct MIME type, good luck having those hosts deliver pack200 compression! Also, there are still several regular competitors that rely on geocities for hosting - most people don't bother with paying for highly customizable webspace. We simply cannot introduce pack200 in a fair way.
Forum members <a href="http://www.java-gaming.org/forums/index.php?topic=15497.msg124228#msg124228
">oNyx</a> and <a href="http://www.java-gaming.org/forums/index.php?topic=15497.msg124243#msg124243
">appel</a>, as well as <a href="http://www.java-gaming.org/forums/index.php?topic=15593.msg124530#msg124530
">myself</a>, have both pointed at the official list of rules as a clear and firm prohibition of Pack200 regardless of the reasons for the prohibition.
Forum members and contributors <a href="http://www.java-gaming.org/forums/index.php?topic=15497.msg124227#msg124227
">moogie</a> and <a href="http://www.java-gaming.org/forums/index.php?topic=15497.msg124239#msg124239
">Riven</a> have both made the argument that there is a way in which Pack200 can be employed that does not require a webhost, and that this configuration should be allowed since it offers the benefits to all contributors and gives no unfair advantage.
All sides have expressed an interest in having an official opinion and/or ruling on the issue, but that has yet to happen.
My opinion: The rules as stated today clearly prohibit any and all use of Pack200. However, I would be happy to see this rule change to allow server-less configurations, provided that moogie and/or Riven make public the process of preparing the Pack200 archive. If the official ruling is that the rules as they stand today do not prohibit a server-less Pack200 configuration, I believe the rules need to be clarified.
What about you? Do you think that the rules as they stand today allow this server-less Pack200 configuration? If not, do you think that the rules should be changed to allow this configuration?
Of course, the final decision will have to come from the contest manager(s), but if we all voice our opinion here then maybe the decision they come to will be the one the majority are happy with.