On Mar 31, 2005, at 4:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
toby cabot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 01/04/2005 01:12:42 AM:
Jeremy,
I agree with the first few bullets.
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 07:40:13AM -0800, Jeremy Boynes wrote:* verification that the src bundle actually builds and results in the same binary as we are distibuting
Is a src bundle is useful to anyone at this stage of the game? For "real" releases, sure, but for now it might make more sense to release binaries only and point people at the source code control system if they want to build. The problem with people building from the source bundle is that if they try to do anything interesting (like make changes to the code) then they're in trouble since they won't have a mechanism to stay in sync or submit patches that apply cleanly. I think that we've got good enough instructions on the wiki so building from svn isn't much more complicated than building from a tarball.
Regards, Toby
Is there a reason why we don't include the svn files in the source tarball
(we didn't in M3). Wouldn't that make it easier for people to make
patches or see a comparison to HEAD to see if a problem they have
encountered has been fixed?
I like the idea, although it would double the size of the jar since .svn includes pristine copies of each file. Maybe we could remove the normal working copies and ask people to do svn revert --recursive after unpacking.
david jencks
John
This e-mail message and any attachments may contain confidential,
proprietary or non-public information. This information is intended
solely for the designated recipient(s). If an addressing or transmission
error has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the sender immediately
and destroy this e-mail. Any review, dissemination, use or reliance upon
this information by unintended recipients is prohibited. Any opinions
expressed in this e-mail are those of the author personally.
