[MonoDevelop] Patch - Support for Git Initial Commit
Miguel de Icaza
miguel at novell.com
Sat Jun 19 15:19:10 EDT 2010
Depends. For some libraries we ship copies from source in contrib
> (e.g. NRefactory, Cecil), but for others we ship binaries in the
> addins (e.g. NUnit, Mono.Debugger.Soft). Debian/Ubuntu packagers hate
> binaries, but they're a lot simpler for us to deal with, so I'd
> suggest going that route initially.
I also hate this.
I hate it for many reasons:
* Not easy to upgrade the code
* Not easy to figure out which branch the code came from
* Not possible to track any changes that were made
* We end up with binaries on the tree, and I detest binaries
* We cant fix the code trivially if we wanted to
* It annoys every packager in the world
* No transparency as to what is behind the binaries
The better option is to either make it a build-time requirement to have the
package properly installed and available, or alternatively put the source
code side-by-side in the tree if we really need to keep all the source code
With GitSharp in particular, we will run into the issue that the library
will likely require Linux-specific and Mac-specific changes as the GitSharp
hackers seem to be mostly Windows hackers. A binary is the worst possible
thing we can do.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Monodevelop-list