At 05:22 15/3/01 +0100, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
>OK but I don't see any big difference between the two approaches. In one
you generate into dist/ + copy into dist/ and the other you tar/zip a set
of files specified in a tar/zip target. You have to be sentient in both
cases or? Ceki
Not really. As a few projects directly use dist (ie the bin-image) in
development it should be well tested/debugged. Creating a new image (even
if it is only marred by the zip/tar files) increases the risk. It also
restricts the type of projects that can use the model.
Just say we are a web-project and want to create a .war as distribution
mechanism. It would not be uncommon for it to also include images under the
directory dist/images. Introducing more risk of corrupted binaries (by
placing zip/tars in images and relying on developer awareness) when it
could be easily avoided is not a good thing ;)
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof." |
| - John Kenneth Galbraith |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
