Definitely yes. I am strongly opposed to the original decision to move binaries to trunk. I encountered a number of build errors when the switch occurred, and it prevents me from tweaking my compiler and SDK settings as I like, without a great deal of work.
Let's move back to source for all of the frameworks, using subrepositories. If we can do a read-only mirror of the im.adium.adium branch of libpurple to our repo that'd be great. Ryan On Mar 29, 2011, at 7:04 PM, Thijs Alkemade wrote: > Hey all, > > For those that might have missed it, yesterday some commits where done for to > move everything to 10.6 and drop PPC. After that to that, Adrian moved all > XCode targets to clang-llvm. The results of these changes are quite > impressive: the latest nightly built in 4 minutes, compared to just over 8 > for the last nightly before dropping 10.5. > > I, on the other hand, was busy changing all pre-built dependencies to 10.6 > and remove PPC. I messed something up, so I had to commit > Frameworks/libpurple.framework/Versions/0.7.11/libpurple twice. Oops. Sorry > all for that extra 10MB in all your repositories. > > In fact, .hg is around 450MB now. Of which: > > 207M .hg/store/data/_frameworks/libpurple.framework > > Yes, by now almost half the data a new developer downloads is old versions of > libpurple which they will probably never even glance at. > > So, as on the one hand build times have halved, and on the other hand our > repository is exploding in size, I think it really should be considered to > move the libpurple sources into the tree instead of the binary framework > (just libpurple, not GStreamer, GLib, etc, as those aren't updated nearly as > often). > > It will probably take some work to modify the build scripts to work this way, > especially to get it to play nice with XCode. But that is effort that will > have to be done anyway. When (I hope it's "when", not "if") Pidgin moves to > Mercurial, it would be great to include it as a subrepository, which means > building it in the same manner. > > Also, it would be easier to debug problems that go through libpurple code, > easier to spot problems with a build (it wouldn't be the first time a binary > frameworks turns out to be missing one or more architectures...). > > I've used the build scripts quite a lot recently, so I don't mind doing all > the work for this myself. But I wasn't around when the decision was made to > do it this way, so maybe I'm completely missing some problems with it. > > Regards, > Thijs
