Re: Removing autogenerated files from svn

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 04:54:21PM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-04-12 at 11:29 -0700, Colin D Bennett wrote:
> > phcoder wrote on Sunday 12 April 2009:
> > > Hello, we all know how annoying are these autogenerated files. We could
> > > remove it. The main argument against it is that people will not be able
> > > to compile without installing a lot of developement tools. It changes
> > > nothing for the users wanting to modify the code. So I propose to remove
> > > these files but in compensation setup a nightly build server. I'm ready
> > > to supply all necessary scripts to create a source tar.gz with
> > > autogenerated files, binary tar.gz and rescue iso for all platforms
> > > where applicable.
> > 
> > Great idea.  I'd love to see this happen.
> 
> Me too.

Me too.

Okuji, can we agree on it this time?  It's annoying for most people, and
release tarballs can include the autogenerated files, so the ruby dependency
is not a problem for end users.

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."