Questions about SVN check-in policies for binaries
As I start using my working copy of the svn repository for Euphoria, I am asking
myself a couple questions about what I'll check in soon. Perhaps these points
deserve to be written somewhere in the repository.
1/ Is any developer supposed to have access to all platforms and compilers
supported?
If the answer is "no", then there is some unpredictability about what will be
checked in in /bin. For instance, since I don't have lcc installed, I won't
generate the lcc libs, and as a result they won't be in sync with libs I may have
modified.
Likewise, if I build say exw.exe, I may not be able to build exu. As a result,
the contents of the checked /bn will reflect different states of the software
again.
2/ (related, yet distinct) Since there is only one exu, one exw.exe etc, but
since there is a plethora of compiler, compiler version and compile options under
which the checked in executables may have been built, this is another cause of
discrepancy and subtle bugs (because the executable was built with this compiler
by the last developer, and not that one). And I'm not even considering the case
where a zealed developer will have cross compiled all the executables, in case it
is possible.
3/ DOS/Windows developers will return source files with /r/n line endings, and
Linux/BSD developers will returns /n line endings. When Mac people chime in, they
may have /r line endings. How is this other source of discrepancies handles? Ok,
perhaps the answer here is: the subversion client takes care of this.
A simple way to avoid the confusion about binnaries could be not to check
binaries in at all. But I think there is a need for a clear statement about what
to do.
CChris
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
