[sugar] binary file in tamtam.git

[James Bergstra]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 09:22:56AM +0530, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 12:34:46PM -0500, James Bergstra wrote:
> > Yes, it is generated from aclient.cpp, using the Makefile in the same directory.
> > It is included in the git repository because in effect, aclient.so depends on
> > several packages that are not installed by default on the OLPC (gcc, for
> > example).  Since, it is not generally possible to generate aclient.so from
> > aclient.cpp on the olpc when we install the activity, I put it in git.
> 
> What about abiword? Should all the binary *.o files be stored in GIT as 
> well? I urge you to rethink your compilation strategy. Binary files have 
> no business being in GIT. You are just wasting the disk space of 
> everybody who clones your repository. If you want to keep precompiled 
> binaries somewhere (similar to the squeak/etoys image) then please keep 
> them outside of GIT. Anywhere wget accessible is fine. Abiword already 
> requires a C compiler so anybody using jhbuild will not have any 
> difficulty recreating your *.so files.

So far, *we* are not using jhbuild, we are developing directly on the OLPC
machines.  Is this a major weirdness on our part?  And are you suggesting that
we should maintain binaries of this library and post them on some arbitrary
website? Wouldn't that potentially defeat the olpc build versioning?

Also, the packaging guy in our group is Nat (Flipo in #sugar) so it would be
great if you could help him to make TamTam's installation mechanism a
conventional one. I've CC'ed him on this reply, but maybe it would be good for
the thread archive if you would kindly post the answer publicly, even if it's
just a hyperlink?

Also, if your point concerns binary files in git, then even in our own
repository aclient.so is a relatively small (?) concern at 250K, what about our
images and sounds?

James
-- 
http://www-etud.iro.umontreal.ca/~bergstrj