On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Daniel Shahaf <[email protected]> wrote: > Robert Burrell Donkin wrote on Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 22:24:07 +0100: >> Conventionally at Apache, the "source release" is canonical and is >> identical to the tagged source in version control. > > FWIW, at Subversion the tagged release and the tarball differ by some > autogenerated files. ('configure' and SWIG headers are present in the > tarball but need to be generated when building from the tag)
Yep :-) > I've seen the same discrepancy in build procedure (from svn v. from > tarball) elsewhere. "source release" and "binary release" are just names which allow us to agree rules and conventions and to express distinctions and similarities. Including resources generated by some process from source means that the rules for "binary releases" apply, not "source release". This is useful but confusing and often needs explanation (patches for documentation gratefully accepted over at legal-discuss). Using other words, including resources under some licenses in an aggregate "binary release" shipped is fine but these shouldn't be in version control when the "source release" is cut. Robert
