Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
> * Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-08-20 23:05]:
>> This seems to be a subset of the "should the repository contain
>> all the release files?" argument. Should the repo contain just
>> the files which build a release, or should they contain all the
>> files that go into a release?
>>
>> One side would argue that everything should be in version
>> control so you can track down bugs. The other side argues that
>> keeping generated files up to date is annoying.
>>
>> The pragmatic answer to this question depends largely on your
>> release process and how much stuff you generate.
>
> Idle musing: if you have a sufficiently able VCS, couldn’t you
> have it both ways? Keep a main branch that contains just the
> essentials, and for a release merge it over to the release branch
> where the generated files are then refreshed and also checked
> back in. No?
>
> I can’t currently think of any reason for which this would fail,
> although I might be missing something obvious.
Yes, technically you can do that, but is it worth the administrative effort
just to keep trunk "clean" of one generated file?
It also presumes that the generated files aren't of any use to day to day
development. "make disttest" is pretty handy to get a clean test of your
distribution.
--
100. Claymore mines are not filled with yummy candy, and it is wrong
to tell new soldiers that they are.
-- The 213 Things Skippy Is No Longer Allowed To Do In The U.S. Army
http://skippyslist.com/list/
