El Viernes, 9 de Febrero de 2007 03:07, Randy McMurchy escribió:
> That's great, but I'm proposing we don't have them at all in SVN.
> Seems, though, that in the conversation you don't remember, Manuel
> mentioned something why we should continue to carry them in SVN.
> I don't remember what it was.
I remember a discussion about that but not the postures of each of us.
The question is that both approach works and are portable (after fixing the
PDF issue in LFS pointed in my other post).
Having the images in SVN have this pros, IMHO:
- Make the sources more auto-contained
- Avoid setting a Makefile envars and updating the XSL version number in
stylesheets/pdf/lfs-admon.xsl.
- Also allow to use customized images, if dessired, and prevent to use newer
upstream ones that might not have a good look for our book layout.
The cons has been already pointed by you.
--
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info
TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
