IDEA & JRE

After reading all the messages concerning inclusion of JRE into IDEA zip
file we've found only one argument which makes sense: download size.

So, the question is: is it really such a big deal to have download size
increased by 7Mb?

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
-


JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"



49 comments
Comment actions Permalink

Hi,

After reading all the messages concerning inclusion of JRE into IDEA zip
file we've found only one argument which makes sense: download size.


Hm, what about the problem with the missing javadoc generator, api-doc,
sources, etc?
IDEA runs out-of-the-box with most features, but to be able to use all, you
still need a custom JDK installed and to configure this.

So, the question is: is it really such a big deal to have download size
increased by 7Mb?


My personal opinion: The 7MB increase doesn't really matter for me, but I
simply prefer smaller downloads to bigger ones with same functionality.

Why not make a non-VM installer that prompts the user to select a JDK
installation. Maybe the InstallAnywhere installer could even force a specifc
version, say 1.4.1-b21?


Regards,
Sascha


0
Comment actions Permalink

Hm, what about the problem with the missing javadoc generator, api-doc,
sources, etc?
IDEA runs out-of-the-box with most features, but to be able to use all,

you

still need a custom JDK installed and to configure this.



Yes you are right. But first of all you should treat the JRE, which is
bundled with IDEA as an important part of IDEA runtime (like a statically
linked library in C++)!

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
-


JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

After reading all the messages concerning inclusion of JRE into IDEA zip
file we've found only one argument which makes sense: download size.


I think the mails in themselves are another serious argument.


So, the question is: is it really such a big deal to have download size
increased by 7Mb?


I'd rather turn the question around: Is it really such a big deal to
create a package without JRE?

and one more: what is the compelling argument to include it in the first
place, as opposed to simply requiring/recommending a JDK version?

regards

0
Comment actions Permalink

Mike Aizatsky wrote:

After reading all the messages concerning inclusion of JRE into IDEA zip
file we've found only one argument which makes sense: download size.

So, the question is: is it really such a big deal to have download size
increased by 7Mb?

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
------------------------------
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"



not too much for me, really.

but, the difference between 655 and 657 is 14 megs.
what are the other 7? don't tell me it's code ;)

moreover, I still think that
1) for EAP builds, since we download new ones very often, IDEA should
come as an archive without jre.
instructions should tell which exact jdk version to use - which may be
provided as a separate zip.

2) For the release version, to cut down dumb support request,
it'd wiser for IDEA to only come bundled with a JDK, both in installer
and archive versions.

Always IDEA code should warn on startup if the jdk version doesn't match
its expectation but leave the option to proceed to keep power users
happy to experiment.

Edo

0
Comment actions Permalink

but, the difference between 655 and 657 is 14 megs.
what are the other 7? don't tell me it's code ;)


Build #651: idea.zip - 14,259,767
Build #657: idea_657_sfx.exe - 21,627,952 bytes

Difference: 7368185 = 7.02684879302978515625 Mb.

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
-


JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

Mike Aizatsky wrote:
>>but, the difference between 655 and 657 is 14 megs.
>>what are the other 7? don't tell me it's code ;)


Build #651: idea.zip - 14,259,767
Build #657: idea_657_sfx.exe - 21,627,952 bytes

Difference: 7368185 = 7.02684879302978515625 Mb.

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
------------------------------
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

but idea657.zip is 27.7 MB

there are 6 six! 657 files on your server.
3 for each of the 2 platforms: installer, zip and ??

Edo

0
Comment actions Permalink

"idea657.zip" and "idea_657_sfx.exe" contain the same distribution.
The difference in size is because they are compressed with different
archivers.

--

Best regards,
Eugene Zhuravlev
JetBrains, Inc, http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


"Edoardo Comar" <ecomar@capeclear.com> wrote in message
news:ao3ov5$9f6$1@is.intellij.net...

Mike Aizatsky wrote:
>>but, the difference between 655 and 657 is 14 megs.
>>what are the other 7? don't tell me it's code ;)
>
>

Build #651: idea.zip - 14,259,767
Build #657: idea_657_sfx.exe - 21,627,952 bytes

>

Difference: 7368185 = 7.02684879302978515625 Mb.

>

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
------------------------------
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>
>
but idea657.zip is 27.7 MB

>

there are 6 six! 657 files on your server.
3 for each of the 2 platforms: installer, zip and ??

>

Edo

>


0
Comment actions Permalink

Hm, what about the problem with the missing javadoc generator, api-doc,
sources, etc?
IDEA runs out-of-the-box with most features, but to be able to use all,

you

still need a custom JDK installed and to configure this.

>
>

Yes you are right. But first of all you should treat the JRE, which is
bundled with IDEA as an important part of IDEA runtime (like a statically
linked library in C++)!


Agreed, every application has it's preferred platform. Many developers were
a lot happier if they could force a specific runtime environment.
Maybe it's the right way for you... I recall there were a lot of problems
caused
by running IDEA with JREs instead of JDKs - even from EAP-Power-Users.

So in case of doubt, I would prefer you to develop nice new IDEA-Features
instead of dealing with unnecessary support requests.


Regards,
Sascha


0
Comment actions Permalink

sorry, I'd like to comment here:

Maybe it's the right way for you... I recall there were a lot of problems
caused
by running IDEA with JREs instead of JDKs - even from EAP-Power-Users.


I cannot believe that that is a significant factor. How long does it
take you to discern an error that stems from running on a JRE? How much
is that multiplied by the number of times this happened??

0
Comment actions Permalink

It's not just the download size (with broadband, who really cares about 28-35M downloads) My issue is having yet another JRE on my system. I counted, I have 11, including the one from IDEA. This seems to be getting a little much, especially since two of them are the reference implementations from Sun (1.3.1 and 1.4.1).

I can understand including the JRE in the download, but the installer should scan the system to look for a compatible JDK/JRE and use that instead. That way, it solves the problem for people who do not have any JRE on their system, but it also stops from installing extra code.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Sascha Weinreuter wrote:
>>> Hm, what about the problem with the missing javadoc generator,
>>> api-doc, sources, etc?
>>> IDEA runs out-of-the-box with most features, but to be able to use
>>> all, you still need a custom JDK installed and to configure this.
>>
>> Yes you are right. But first of all you should treat the JRE, which
>> is bundled with IDEA as an important part of IDEA runtime (like a
>> statically linked library in C++)!
>

Agreed, every application has it's preferred platform. Many
developers were a lot happier if they could force a specific runtime
environment. Maybe it's the right way for you... I recall there were
a lot of problems caused
by running IDEA with JREs instead of JDKs - even from EAP-Power-Users.


At one time (build 632) IDEA could not find the jdk if it was in a directory
with a space in it. A number of people were accused of running IDEA with the
jre, when in fact they were using the jdk (including me, see thread:
http://lists.jetbrains.com/pipermail/eap-bugs/2002-July/003399.html)

> So in case of doubt, I would prefer you to develop nice new

IDEA-Features instead of dealing with unnecessary support requests.


I don't really mind the extra 7 MB. I have however changed the startup
script to point to my jdk and have deleted the jre directory from the IDEA
installation dir. I wouldn't mind it at all if I could download a little
faster. At the moment I get 30Kbytes/s from intellij.net from other sites I
get download speeds of over 150Kbytes/s.

--Bas


0
Comment actions Permalink

3 for each of the 2 platforms: installer, zip and ??


And self-extracting archive.

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
-


JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

Is it really a problem that IDEA has something inside it while it is not
registered anywhere?

Please also not that :


--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
-


JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


"Sean Garagan" <itnadmin@jetbrains.com> wrote in message
news:4014637.1034254218464.JavaMail.jrun@is.intellij.net...

It's not just the download size (with broadband, who really cares about

28-35M downloads) My issue is having yet another JRE on my system. I
counted, I have 11, including the one from IDEA. This seems to be getting a
little much, especially since two of them are the reference implementations
from Sun (1.3.1 and 1.4.1).
>

I can understand including the JRE in the download, but the installer

should scan the system to look for a compatible JDK/JRE and use that
instead. That way, it solves the problem for people who do not have any JRE
on their system, but it also stops from installing extra code.


0
Comment actions Permalink



You should treat the JRE, which is
bundled with IDEA as an important part of IDEA runtime (like a statically
linked library in C++)!

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
-


JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

I downloaded the installer variant for Windows and this one is a whole 34 Mb. So what are those 14 Mb in there. It cannot be the installer, can it? That would be horrible.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Hi Mike,

I guess I look at it a bit differently. This seems like the equivalent of statically linking libc into your code instead of just dynamically linking to the version in /usr. It reminds me of all the Windows apps out there that insist on installing their own version of the MFC libraries, even though Windows supplies what should be the canonical one.

From a support point of view, I can definately understand the position, which is why I am not suggesting removing the JRE from the download, I am suggesting that the installer be smart enough to look for one that you do support. That way, it is easier to support multiple JRE versions (and newer ones) without having to constantly update the packaged one.

0
Comment actions Permalink

That way, it is easier to support multiple JRE versions (and newer ones)
without having to constantly update the packaged one.


The idea is not to support multiple JRE versions at all - it costs as a lot
of efforts. We will support only the JRE provided.

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
-


JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

Mike Aizatsky wrote:

The idea is not to support multiple JRE versions at all - it costs as
a lot of efforts. We will support only the JRE provided.


Mike, I think you've hit the nail on the head there.

I personally am not bothered either way (I have a fast connection and big
hard disk :)), but in the spirit of mediation, I think I will add my
tuppence to the pot.

I completely understand bundling the jre with the full product, it is
necessary to run IDEA as it is meant to run on a completely fresh system.
But at the end of the day you can't prevent people deleting the bundled JRE
and using a JRE from a different location, and by the sounds of this
discussion there are quite a few people who will do that.

Considering this fact, I'm not quite sure why there is such reluctance to
provide an EAP installation without a bundled JRE. The people who will
remove the bundled JRE are only going to see this reluctance as 'being
difficult', as it's forcing them to jump through hoops they otherwise
wouldn't have to.

We have a saying in England - "The customer is always right". Maybe you
should just let these 'wrong' customers have what they want, but the message
from Mike should be clear and understood:

"We will support only the JRE provided."

N.


0
Comment actions Permalink

Very nicely put Nathan, at least if there are "with" and "without" JRE versions you can see from the download stats which is the most popular.

My personal vote is for the "without" version. I've got plenty of JREs and JDKs on my large HD and I just don't need any more. IDEA_JAVA_HOME was a perfect solution for me and until you can get the same bandwith on IntelliJ.net as Oracle then please give us the option for a more "reasonable" download.

BTW, I'm a paying customer, I have two $400 licenses so I must be right!!!

-John-

0
Comment actions Permalink

I buy this. Put the effort into improving IDEA.
Thanks,
Ales Pour

"Mike Aizatsky" <mike@intellij.com> wrote in message
news:ao40ee$ju5$1@is.intellij.net...

The idea is not to support multiple JRE versions at all - it costs as a

lot

of efforts. We will support only the JRE provided.

>

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
------------------------------
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>
>


0
Comment actions Permalink

I'm with the Jetbrains guys on this one, if I'm correctly reading between lines. If supplying a standard and consistent JRE that IDEA uses reduces the amount of time the QA folks spend running down bug reports caused by using different versions of the JRE, I'm all for it. Anything that reduces the workload on the Jetbrains folks and brings the release date closer is fine by me.

I don't get the argument that "it's perfectly understandable to require a particular JRE version in the release, but give us a download without it anyway." That's fine if someone has the correct version already installed and intends to use it, but many have already stated that they want to use their chosen JDK/JRE version. To me, this invites nuisance bug reports.

Perhaps some code should be added that disables IDEA unless the required JRE version is found. If you've already got it installed, bully for you. If not, then the Jetbrains QA folks don't have to worry about dealing with bug reports that wouldn't have been submitted in the first place if the proper JRE version was used.

0
Comment actions Permalink

Eric Sheffer wrote:

Perhaps some code should be added that disables IDEA unless the
required JRE version is found. If you've already got it installed,
bully for you. If not, then the Jetbrains QA folks don't have to
worry about dealing with bug reports that wouldn't have been
submitted in the first place if the proper JRE version was used.

Of course. In fact, IDEA has worked like this pretty much all the way
along - requiring a minimum version of the JDK to run. Remember the hoo-ha
when they moved to 1.4 :) All that really should be different since #657 is
that IDEA requires a specific version of the JRE to run.

It's IntelliJ's software, so they have carte blanche to enforce the "We will
support only the JRE provided." policy in any way they choose out of the
myriad of different methods (obviously some methods are more obstreperous
than others ;) ). If the customer chooses the install without the JRE
bundled, then it's entirely up to the customer to configure the installation
to work correctly.

N.


0
Comment actions Permalink

One question: is it allowed to distribute the JRE without unneeded stuff - like the
Java plugin installer? Or other stuff IDEA does not use?


Mike Aizatsky wrote:
>> That way, it is easier to support multiple JRE versions (and newer ones)
>>without having to constantly update the packaged one.


The idea is not to support multiple JRE versions at all - it costs as a lot
of efforts. We will support only the JRE provided.

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
------------------------------
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"



--

Erb

==============================================================
"Most of you are familiar with the virtues of a programmer.
There are three, of course: laziness, impatience, and hubris."
- Larry Wall
==============================================================

0
Comment actions Permalink

Looks like it's allowed.

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
-


JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

"Mike Aizatsky" <mike@intellij.com> wrote in message
news:ao40ee$ju5$1@is.intellij.net...

That way, it is easier to support multiple JRE versions (and newer

ones)

without having to constantly update the packaged one.

>

The idea is not to support multiple JRE versions at all - it costs as a

lot

of efforts. We will support only the JRE provided.

>

That seems like a wise move to me, although I hope IntelliJ doesn't modify
the jre in any way (much like Borland used to with JBuilder) so I can still
manually upgrade revisions of 1.4.1 (1.4.1_01, 1.4.1_02) when they become
available; to fix things like the StringBuffer Memory leak in 1.4.1
(4724129) kill my app which suffers due to its use of JDOM (which I notice
IDEA uses too).

Also I'd want to know that IntelliJ would still be pretty quick off the mark
in supporting important new features when the JRE is significantly changed
or improved.

It seems a little messy as we still need a JDK for the tools & Javadocs;
which actually means I've three copies of 1.4.1 JRE installed; one in IDEA,
one in the sdk directory and the duplicate one in program files in the
typically wasteful sun install that we've all learnt to live with.

I wouldn't relish downloading a sizable 34MB ideaXXX.exe for every update to
IDEA after 3.0 is released; are there're any plans to release patch sets..
or the addtion of an online update like Forte/Sun One..

The idea657_sfx.exe is a nice way to reduce the size of idea657.zip; would a
Windows .MSI install version help reduce the size of the .exe version?

Just some of my thoughts,

--
Richard Osbaldeston
(http://www.osbald.co.uk)


0
Comment actions Permalink

Richard,

IDEA supplied JRE has the tools.jar so you have full compiler inside.

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
-


JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"


0
Comment actions Permalink

I have not read all the messages, but besides download time (which is already an important issue if we are expected to dowonload a new version every other day), the following (important to ME) come to my mind:

- ability to use the same package on every platform
- ability to switch to new JDK versions if they become available (which also allows us to give you feedback on our experiences with it)
- ability to downgrade from a JDK if the new version does not work on a configuration which you may not have tested
- transparency of the install process (guaranteed no registry entreies etc., i.e. only modifications to the system is the archive extraction)
- very easy switch of intellij versions (remember, this is all still beta, which means there must be a fallback possibility)

I have seen somebody who suggests spending more time on new nifty features. I don't mind that, but I'd actually prefer to get the current features stable before adding new ones. Even if this is beta software, we are not able to test it thoroughly if we can't work with it. Currently I'm still at 651 and VERY reluctant to switch to a newer version (unless it's again an archive distribution).

Best regards, Remigius.

0
Comment actions Permalink

I want to repeat my argument to reuse the existing JDK,
since it has not been said in this thread so far:

As long as IDEA uses the latest version of JDK, my project runs on the same version, just a different installation.

Which means the operating system must have both sets of binaries, shared libraries and jars in RAM, and page them both out and in.

Do we all have
- unlimited download speed
- unlimited hard disk space
- unlimited IO bandwidth
- AND unlimited RAM?
Sorry, but my app needs these resources for other tasks.

0
Comment actions Permalink


Nischkaa Kovacs wrote:

I want to repeat my argument to reuse the existing JDK,
since it has not been said in this thread so far:

As long as IDEA uses the latest version of JDK, my project runs on the same version, just a different installation.

Which means the operating system must have both sets of binaries, shared libraries and jars in RAM, and page them both out and in.


This will happen regardless of whether IDEA uses the same JDK version as
your project. Two java.exe processes will not share code or data in
memory.

So I'm 90% with IntelliJ on this one. The only thing I want is separate
downloads of their required JRE and the latest IDEA build so that we
don't have to download the JRE over and over again. While it's not such
a problem for me (wheee business-class DSL), it still irks me and I can
see how it could be a big problem for others with less bandwidth.

Do we all have
- unlimited download speed
- unlimited hard disk space
- unlimited IO bandwidth
- AND unlimited RAM?


- Unlimited IntelliJ developer time wasted by bugs reported which are
just caused by an incorrect JDK version?

Can you tell me that, as a developer, you don't mind your users wasting
your time with spurious bug reports because they can't be bothered to
ensure that their software installations and configurations are correct?

Ciao,
Gordon

--
Gordon Tyler
Software Developer, R&D
Sitraka -- Performance is Mission Critical

0
Comment actions Permalink

Well, if that were true, Idea on Solaris were dead.

Please continue to provide a download w/o JRE and a easy customizable start
script.

Thanks,
Matthias

"Mike Aizatsky" <mike@intellij.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:ao3l3j$86f$1@is.intellij.net...

Hm, what about the problem with the missing javadoc generator, api-doc,
sources, etc?
IDEA runs out-of-the-box with most features, but to be able to use all,

you

still need a custom JDK installed and to configure this.

>
>

Yes you are right. But first of all you should treat the JRE, which is
bundled with IDEA as an important part of IDEA runtime (like a statically
linked library in C++)!

>

--
Best regards,
Mike Aizatsky.
------------------------------
JetBrains, Inc / IntelliJ Software
http://www.intellij.com
"Develop with pleasure!"

>
>


0

Please sign in to leave a comment.