Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]> writes: > Daniel Mendler <[email protected]> writes: > >> Also in my opinion it would be reasonable to simply not solve the >> "offline problem", if at the same time the "make clean" action is >> adjusted to not delete cached dependencies. > > Morgan's patch only removes packages on make cleanall.
It seems that Morgan invokes "make cleanall" too often, while "make clean" would do, leaving him in a state where dependencies need to be fetched again, breaking "offline mode"? >> ... If you >> also want to protect against "git clean" you could install the >> dependencies outside the repository, e.g., in $XDG_CACHE_HOME/org-dev-deps/. > > That's a bad idea that can backfire if users need self-contained installation. > I would personally be frustrated if git clean -xfd did not put the > repository into truly clean state. Sure, but you cannot have both. Either "make cleanall" removes everything but then you're left without dependencies (no offline mode), or you preserve offline mode but then you cannot remove everything. Vendoring is a third option, but it comes but it comes with the inherent vendoring risks, which had been discussed (Distributions unintentionally packaging the vendored code, Package managers accidentally installing the vendored code, ...). So which alternative do you want? What is the preference? 1. Offline mode, compromising on cleaning. 2. Clean repository, compromising on offline mode. 3. Vendoring, accepting the vendoring risks. Daniel
