On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 11:37:45AM +0000, John Tapsell wrote:
> > ./configure is a generated script. Including it in the repository is not
> > something many projects do, since one of the things developers will be
> > working on is to change how that file is generated. Including it in the
> > release tar-balls is something every project (that uses autoconf) does,
> > since those are aimed at end-users.
>
> Reason that it should be included:
>
> * configure scripts usually are included. git was the first source
> code in a long time that I've seen without one
I think you are confusing "checked into version control" with
"distributed with release tarballs". Most projects do not do the
former[1], but almost all (including git) do the latter.
This discussion is about things checked into the repository.
[1] Sorry, I don't have exact numbers, but I have never encountered this
before.
> * we have lots other files in git.git that are autogenerated (the
> documentation files, for example)
I'm not aware of any auto-generated files that are checked in. Can you
give an example?
> * people are used to being able to do "./configure; make; make install"
Right. They do it from the release tarball. Getting the version straight
from source-control usually means you have to have autoconf if you want
to run it.
> * It doesn't hurt anyone to do it.
Yes, it does. Having generated files in your source repository means:
- you generate useless noise commits when those files are
re-autogenerated
- developers must make sure that they are not accidentally committing
auto-generated cruft that have nothing to do with their actual
changes
-Peff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
