tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig R. McClanahan" <Craig.McClana...@eng.sun.com>
Subject Re: Tomcat 3.2 proposal question
Date Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:32:30 GMT
Sam Ruby/Raleigh/IBM wrote:

> Larry Isaacs wrote:
> >
> > 3) Disagrees with the philosophy of keeping just
> >     source under source control.
>
> That's the important one for me.  In general, I my experience has been that
> when people try to check in outputs of build processes into the same tree
> that the source is kept in, they inevitably get out of synch.
>

None of this, however, should change one other thing we should be doing --
including the pre-built binaries with the binary *distribution* of Tomcat 3.2.
This is a task that can be handled by the person who assembles the
distribution, totally independently of whether the binaries are in CVS or not.

>
> For similar reasons, I was very pleased when Craig removed all the html
> from the jakarta-site cvs tree.
>

Yep.  This was the use case that convinced me Sam was right :-).

(For those who don't know, the web pages of the Jakarta web site are generated
from input files that end in ".htsrc" -- previously we had both "source" and
"generated" versions of all the pages in CVS, and it was a total nightmare.)

>
> - Sam Ruby
>

Craig

====================
See you at ApacheCon Europe <http://www.apachecon.com>!
Session VS01 (23-Oct 13h00-17h00):  Sun Technical Briefing
Session T06  (24-Oct 14h00-15h00):  Migrating Apache JServ
                                    Applications to Tomcat



Mime
View raw message