On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 10:25, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 2019-09-29, sebb wrote: > > > On Sun, 29 Sep 2019 at 17:21, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Projects that have a configure script usually include that in the source > >> distribution but not in the source repository (at least for autotools > >> users). > > > But is that correct? > > This is what people expect.
But that does not make it right. > As others have already pointed out it is very common to not check in the > configure script but to include it with source tarballs. Users can be > expected to have male installed but only few of them will install > autotools. I'll ask again: is the generated config file universally applicable? If so, put it in the source repo. If not, then having it in the source tarball is misleading as it may not work for the downloader. At least the file should have some clue as to which OSes it applies, eg configure.freebsd > > Surely the source archive should only contain source that is in the > > source repo? > > I'm not sure this is true for generated artifacts that can be verified > easily. Also I'm pretty sure some other C based projects of the ASF do > ship a generated configure script as part of the source tarball as well. Again, not proof. And anyway, how do reviewers check whether the configure file is correct? It's very complicated; a single spurious space in the wrong place could break it. If it does not change, it can be added to the source repo once, and validated then. It then needs no further checking. > Stefan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
