Dan Kegel wrote:
> No.  Generating files is the point of gyp.  Nothing says they have to
> be in the source tree.

Out of all of the proposals out there, the only ones that make any
sense to my software-developin' mind are the ones that keep the build
files in the source tree.  I find it much easier to type "make" or
"xcodebuild" or whatever without having to keep track of where I am.
Dumping all of our build files into a single directory without any
real association to the source they build sucks.

An objdir-ish solution would make sense, except the native build
systems we use don't really work in terms of objdirs, so we'd just
wind up generating a parallel directory structure with nothing but
xcode projects, Makefiles, and other similar junk.  Plus, it means
that we can't supply a pre-gypped srcdir tarball, which can frustrate
the snot out of casual developers.

The only change that makes any amount of sense to me would be to move
all GYP-generated files one directory below where they are now, by
introducing new build-file directories.  That'd ease the svn:ignore
burden.  But those files are still in the source tree.

One of the intentional properties of our current GYP setup is that the
generated files are as good as checked-in.  GYP generation looks and
feels just like another file in the working copy being updated. I
think that this transparency is a really good thing.  You've pointed
out a legitimate flaw, so perhaps we should focus on other solutions
to that problem.  There are ways to fix this that don't involve moving
files around.

Mark

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to