On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 05:22:22PM +1000, Stephen Thorne wrote: > On 2/27/07, Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >What about abiword? Should all the binary *.o files be stored in GIT as > >well? I urge you to rethink your compilation strategy. Binary files have > >no business being in GIT. You are just wasting the disk space of > >everybody who clones your repository. If you want to keep precompiled > >binaries somewhere (similar to the squeak/etoys image) then please keep > >them outside of GIT. Anywhere wget accessible is fine. Abiword already > >requires a C compiler so anybody using jhbuild will not have any > >difficulty recreating your *.so files. > > I just had a chat with Nat about this issue. Apparently the method > currently used for working on TamTam is to jump on an XO, clone the > git tree, and start hacking. This is why the so file is there. > > You suggest being able to get the correct .so file off a server, that > sounds feasable. Is there a way of making git do this when it knows > it's being cloned onto a system that's an XO? Or possibly TamTam could > download it when it first runs and it notices it is missing... > > Until a decent solution that doesn't interrupt the development > processes of the TamTam team can be implemented, I don't see a 250kb > .so file being kept under version control as being an issue.
Ah, OK. Better to waste a little disk space than waste your time. ;-) _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/sugar
