Gilles Chanteperdrix kirjoitti:
Heikki Lindholm wrote:
 > Gilles Chanteperdrix kirjoitti:
 > > Heikki Lindholm wrote:
 > >  > Hi,
> > > > > > One thing that always bothered my in fusion cvs: why do the generated > > > docs have to be in the cvs/svn? Why not just let them be... well... > > > generated? > > > > Because it allows the releases to be done taking the docs from the
 > > generated dir instead of generating them.
> > How about having "dist" or similar target in the Makefile do that, > instead? Releases aren't that often anyway.

dist does that only if documentation generation is enabled, if this was
not an option, it would not allow separate maintenance of documentation
and code. Some time ago, the plan was even to let documentation have its
own configure, like the simulator.

If you do not checkout the "doc" or "sim" directory, the build system is
supposed to continue working properly. It will not let you enable
documentation generation or simulator, though.

Ok. I haven't actually tried that ever.

> > > IOW: separate maintenance of documentation and code. > > > > What I do not understand is what is so bothering ? > > (1) Kind of like having binaries in the repo: changes between generated > docs aren't usually meaningful. Doing diff between version dirs where > there's not much changed codewise, but different generations of docs > brings unneccessarily big diff or needs special attention not to. Btw.
diff (and probably svn diff) have a --exclude option. So, you can skip

Indeed. But this is the special attention I'm talking about ;) I'm still not convinced about the "need 'em for the release" reasoning. Let's put it this way: what trouble would it bring, if we had "dist" always generate docs for a release (and not have them in the repo)?

> Many projects don't even have autoconf/make generated stuff (=configure) > in the repository..

I guess this is a matter of taste, but by putting the generated stuff
into the repository, we do not impose contributors and users who want to
work with the svn head to have the proper version of the autotools
installed and to know how to use them. This is a little effort with a
big pay off.

True. I've had my share of autoconf troubles and don't like the whole system at all. Having it ready-made is definitely the right thing to do.

-- Heikki Lindholm

Reply via email to