On 24 Jun 2013, at 00:15, Gavin Lambert wrote:

> 
> Generally speaking, generated files should never be included in a source
> control system.  Doing so [...] carries the risk of having people not realise
> that the files are generated and then modifying or submitting patches for
> those files, which are then lost when the files do get regenerated.
> 

Yes, I can see the sense in that.


> 
> So you really should either be using the tarball, which should have
> everything you need pregenerated, or you should be using an environment such
> as MinGW that lets you run autotools and gmmproc to generate the files
> yourself from the git source.
> 
> 

But not in that.  A better solution might be for gtkmm to work the same way as 
gtk (i.e. provide its own auto-generation tools such that developers can use 
the compiler of their choice).  It's not as if MSVC is some obscure, little 
used compiler.  Gtkmm's Git repo even provides MSVC build projects - even 
though they can't be used to build from the Git sources!  I'm not sure if 
there's really much point in them being there.  I appreciate of course, that 
all this stuff is work in progress so maybe there's a good argument here for 
updating gtkmm by taking a leaf from gtk's book?  A library that's intended to 
be buildable with MSVC shouldn't still be relying on tools that will only work 
with a Bourne shell.

John
_______________________________________________
gtkmm-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list

Reply via email to