Re: Questions about SVN check-in policies for binaries
- Posted by CChris <christian.cuvier at agriculture.gouv.fr> Jun 21, 2007
- 647 views
Robert Craig wrote: > > CChris wrote: > > 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? > > No, but you should be able to build on at least one platform, > so you can test your changes at run-time to some extent > before checking them back in. > looks like a decent minimum to ask. > > 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. > > True. > > > 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. > > It's possible that the subversion client handles this. > I haven't seen any problems like 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. > > I would say, don't bother to check in your binaries > (executables, libraries, etc), just your source (and documentation). > > Currently, I am the one who makes the official releases, > so I figure there is some value in my checking in > executables periodically, so others can test them if they want, > before I do a release. > > Regards, > Rob Craig > Rapid Deployment Software > <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a> It looks like we mostly agree on this. Perhaps writing it down in the source overview.doc isn't a bad idea? CChris