ext2resize-devel

Re: [ext2resize] [Ext2resize-cvs] ext2resize/src Makefile.am, 1.11, 1.12

[Petter R. <pe...@hu...>]

I'm moving the discussion to ext2resize-devel@, as it seem a better
place to discuss the development.

[Petter Reinholdtsen]
> Log Message:
> Include all the source files (also the unused ones) in the source tarball.

[Coywolf Qi Hunt]
> Why do that? We don't need ext2_mkfs.c and tst.c.

Because I believe the source tarball should reflect the content of the
upstream CVS, and thus be a reliably and distributed backup on the CVS
content.  If we do not need them, why are they not removed from CVS?
As long as they are present in CVS, I believe they should be in the
source tarball as well, to make sure the tarball is complete and can
be used to recreate the CVS content.

Friendly,
-- 
Petter Reinholdtsen

Re: [ext2resize] [Ext2resize-cvs] ext2resize/src Makefile.am, 1.11, 1.12

[Coywolf Qi H. <co...@gm...>]

2006/6/12, Petter Reinholdtsen <pe...@hu...>:
> I'm moving the discussion to ext2resize-devel@, as it seem a better
> place to discuss the development.
>
> [Petter Reinholdtsen]
> > Log Message:
> > Include all the source files (also the unused ones) in the source tarball.
>
> [Coywolf Qi Hunt]
> > Why do that? We don't need ext2_mkfs.c and tst.c.
>
> Because I believe the source tarball should reflect the content of the
> upstream CVS, and thus be a reliably and distributed backup on the CVS
> content.  If we do not need them, why are they not removed from CVS?
> As long as they are present in CVS, I believe they should be in the
> source tarball as well, to make sure the tarball is complete and can
> be used to recreate the CVS content.

I think a tarball is for users. They don't need to see things like tst
(for test) which is for developers.
-- 
Coywolf Qi Hunt

[ext2resize] Should the source tarball include all the source in CVS? (Was: ext2resize/src Makefile.am, 1.11, 1.12)

[Petter R. <pe...@hu...>]

[Coywolf Qi Hunt]
> I think a tarball is for users. They don't need to see things like
> tst (for test) which is for developers.

Well, in my experience almost all the users are using a prebuilt
binary package prepared by the distributions.  The source tarball is
used by developers and others interested in the source for the
package, and I believe those interested in the source should get to
see all the source when they download the source tarball.

If the unused source is completely useless, it should be removed.  If
not, it can be useful also for those reading the source using the
source tarball, and thus should be included there.

Friendly,
-- 
Petter Reinholdtsen