[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Well, one coworker has suggested storing the output of the build process ( > that is, the final executables, dlls, etc. ) in CVS.
As the manual plainly states, CVS is not a build system, only a potential component of it. You *could* put all that stuff in CVS, but it isn't very useful. Archives should go elsewhere, and that could be automated by your build system. > But, I > have some reservations about putting it in CVS. I can't however, put my > finger on exactly why I think CVS isn't the best place for this stuff. Generally, you want to put source files, not derived files, under version control. For instance, it wouldn't make sense to keep object files generated by a compiler in CVS, since they can always be recreated at any time. It would be better to make sure you can recreate any build from the repository, and keep archives of builds as a convenience, if desired. -Matt _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
