? That is, would you save versions of things like
executables, p-code, or DLLs? My gut says no, better to pull the source code for
the version/revision we want to run/test/distrubute and compile from that
whenever we need it. But what do people generally do?
Thanks,
Rachel
At 04:39 PM 11/29/2004, Rachel Suddeth \(Bloodhound Software\) wrote:
would you save versions of things like executables, p-code, or DLLs
No. Not in CVS.
It's a good idea to save a copy of whatever you release to your clients so
you can recreate your client's environment. However, CVS is not
Rachel Suddeth (Bloodhound Software) wrote:
? That is, would you save versions of things like
executables, p-code, or DLLs? My gut says no, better to pull
the source code for the version/revision we want to
run/test/distrubute and compile from that whenever we need
it. But what do people
People do, but in most cases it's not considered best practice. If you
can reproduce the binaries from source, then don't put them under CVS;
tag the sources and store the environment in a reproducible way.
If the binaries are not reproducible from source, then there are two
schools of
Hello,
* On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 04:53:51PM -0500 Jim.Hyslop wrote:
Your instincts are correct. Use CVS to manage files that cannot be
recreated by an automated process.
Well, yes and no.
The problem with recreating some files is, that this recreation might
not work at any future point of
