Jeffrey, The source in cvs does represent the documentation at any point, not the other way around. What your suggesting would lead to ever more dissimilarity between a build and the docs in the system. We would need to check in new docs whenever a source file is changed! That is just wrong.
Also, we do builds and tag the source control system when a release is done. It you get all of cvs (by tag or date) and follow the build/doc/release process you will get exactly what you want. It will be a snapshot at that point in time. Everything will match up. I'm a strong believer in *not* storing binary distributions in the same cvs repository as the source. In fact, I would argue against storing most of the stuff that we have in bin if we weren't a build tool that built itself. I agree that the website should probably contain the latest docs of the current cvs system, as well as the last major release. But the source control system should not. I strongly believe that we should not store duplicate and redundant information under source control. We store source, not many formats of the source; just the source in the source control system. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey McManus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Scott Hernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 4:41 PM Subject: Re: [nant-dev] documentation error > I understand that it shouldn't be edited directly, but > I think it should at least be checked in, because it > represents part of the distributable package of the > application. One objective of source code is to be > able to view, at a glance, the state of an application > (including its distributable packages; i.e. its > documentation) at any point in time. Whether it was > generated by a human or by an automated process > shouldn't matter. If somebody needs to re-create some > arbitrary build three years from now to replace it on > a production system that standardized on it, they're > going to be hosed because they won't be able to get > documentation that matches the build they have. > > The practical problem that I (and lots of others, in > all likelihood) are having is, without a current > snapshot of the state of the task lists, there is no > way to get a reference to the latest tasks, short of > re-building the project, which (it seems to me) you > shouldn't have to do just to get docs. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ Nant-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
