----- Original Message ----
> From: Doug Cutting <cutt...@apache.org>
> To: thrift-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Wed, August 18, 2010 6:44:03 PM
> Subject: Re: bootstrap.sh in tarballs
>
> On 08/18/2010 03:33 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> > Nononono Doug. What they're discussing is perfectly ok and is done
> > in other projects. bootstrap.sh is a pre-configuration script not
> > actual thrift source.
>
> That's why I asked whether it was source code.
You should probably take a look at the contents of bootstrap.sh for
yourself. It's a trivial little convenience script that creates the
configure-based build scripts and Makefiles.
> If it's not considered such, then it shouldn't be included. We're proposing
>to declare it "non-source" primarily because it causes problems when included
>in releases. Otherwise we'd be happy to declare it part of the project's
>source, no? I understand there's precedent for this, and I'm fine excluding
>it, but, if there's another way that permits us to release more source-like
>stuff and still not confuse users, I think that'd be preferable. It's not
>black-and-white, source-or-non-source.
Firstly what a project releases is up to them. How they manufacture
a tarball for release out of the pristine sources in svn is also
their call. All we ask is for a repeatable process.
But my main attitude is let's not sweat the small stuff. If there's
good reason not to release the script, and there seems to be, then
let's not release it. It's causing more confusion than it's worth.
