Line 66:
Line 66:
:::::Ok, good luck finding your way with your head up your ass.[[User:Tueidj|Tueidj]] 17:37, 22 November 2010 (CET)
:::::Ok, good luck finding your way with your head up your ass.[[User:Tueidj|Tueidj]] 17:37, 22 November 2010 (CET)
::::@Tueidj Thanks! From you that's a compliment. [[User:Dashxdr|Dashxdr]] 18:03, 22 November 2010 (CET)
::::@Tueidj Thanks! From you that's a compliment. [[User:Dashxdr|Dashxdr]] 18:03, 22 November 2010 (CET)
+
::::::Dashxdr: I believe what teuidj is saying is that a WAD file is simply a container, and there is no real reason to use it to contain the contents of a channel. Its the contents that matter, and the WAD is extracted by a WAD installer anyway, so it makes more sense just to embed the actual channel contents in the installer binary, rather than a WAD. And there's no need to pack a WAD therefore. However the problem with that is it makes life hard for the end user, if the contents of a channel must be packed in a binary, rather than just dropping a WAD on the SD card and installing it. But WADs are the distribution method of choice for warez VC/WW, so any sort of installer for them is facilitating warez. I'm not trying to take either side in this argument, just trying to clarify some stuff. --[[User:SifJar|SifJar]] 20:10, 22 November 2010 (CET)