From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: .cvsignore file |
Date: | 2002-10-12 04:56:46 |
Message-ID: | 9519.1034398606@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 00:22, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This strikes me as a bad idea. We use .cvsignore only for files that
>> should survive "make distclean", which the built docs files surely
>> shouldn't.
> Why not ignore the set of compiled files as well? I realize its a much
> larger list, but seems a fairly common thing to do.
Well, exactly, it's a much larger list, and hence a much larger
maintenance effort. If it were near-zero cost to maintain then
I'd be okay with it ... but right now, it seems most reasonable
to expect people to do "make distclean" before they try a "cvs diff".
In practice, you have to be mighty savvy to do "cvs update"s without a
"make distclean" beforehand --- I don't ever risk it myself; the extra
machine cycles for a full rebuild are way cheaper than my time to debug
an incomplete rebuild. So I have little concern for the "cvs diff"
case.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-12 05:02:59 | Re: Catalogs Doc update |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-10-12 00:09:31 | Re: inline newNode() |