[sugar] binary file in tamtam.git
Joshua N Pritikin
Tue Feb 27 03:54:05 EST 2007
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 05:22:22PM +1000, Stephen Thorne wrote:
> On 2/27/07, Joshua N Pritikin <jpritikin at pobox.com> wrote:
> >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.
> I just had a chat with Nat about this issue. Apparently the method
> currently used for working on TamTam is to jump on an XO, clone the
> git tree, and start hacking. This is why the so file is there.
> You suggest being able to get the correct .so file off a server, that
> sounds feasable. Is there a way of making git do this when it knows
> it's being cloned onto a system that's an XO? Or possibly TamTam could
> download it when it first runs and it notices it is missing...
> Until a decent solution that doesn't interrupt the development
> processes of the TamTam team can be implemented, I don't see a 250kb
> .so file being kept under version control as being an issue.
Better to waste a little disk space than waste your time. ;-)
More information about the Sugar-devel