Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
>
> ben> I'm being driven slowly mad by the number of files that have to be in
> ben> the CVS tree but also get modified by code. Most of them I can deal
> ben> with, but one I need some feedback on.
>
> ben> In general, Makefile.ssl is to Makefile (why???),
>
> I'm guessing at EAY's intensions here, but I've noticed that there are
> a couple of different Makefile.* in some directories, like crypto/des/.
> My guess is that EAY wanted to provide for variants if needed, with
> Makefile becoming a link to the Makefile.xxx that would suit the
> current OS best.
Possibly so, I suppose.
> ben> and dependencies tacked on to the end of Makefile.ssl.
>
> What is really so bad with that? I know, if you do a lot of changes
> everywhere, especially adding new files or changing what files are
> #included, you end up doing a lot of dependency rechecking, but other
> than that, not really...
What is so bad is that each developer ends up with different
dependencies, so they constantly fight over the CVS commits. So, there's
nothing wrong with having dependencies, in fact, they are a Good Thing,
but they don't belong in a CVS controlled file.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
