On 7/18/05, Matthias Clasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 20:23 +0200, Ikke wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 13:28 -0400, Luis Villa wrote: > > > > I think the advantages of adding make distcheck are bigger than the > > > > disadvantages. > > > > > > OK, but what are they? :) > > Making sure people doing anonymous cvs checkouts will at any time be > > able to build the package they co, not running in major autotool > > problems just before a release tarball should be made,... > > > > I think that ensuring that make distcheck works at release time is the > maintainers responsibility. It is only important that it works at the > time the release is made.
While I generally agree, I think there is some value in being able to build tarballs and hence easily build packages between releases- I feel strongly we'd have a more stable project if we could easily build/distribute daily snapshots like we used to. Not sure if that is worth the admitted pain of nagging/etc., especially since ATM no one is offering to build daily snaps. > There is little value in being pestered about > every time a checkin temporarily breaks make distcheck, e.g. because a > new symbol was added without adding it to gtk.symbols. FWIW, note that in this particular example, the test occurs in make check, which I have gotten the impression most people feel should pass constantly- but maybe I'm wrong here? Luis _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
