login
Header Space

 
 

Re: Git Vs. Svn for a project which *must* distribute binaries too.

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Bryan Childs <godeater@...>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, <git@...>
Date: Monday, June 4, 2007 - 6:29 pm

On 6/5/07, Bryan Childs <godeater@gmail.com> wrote:

If your infrastructure to build the binaries is automated, you can
easily script the build for new incoming commits. The output of
git-describe is really useful for this if you are going to name your
builds `git describe`-<arch>.tar.gz.

OTOH, commit is different from push (vs SVN where both are one op),
and that means that when using git you can present a large change as a
better-explained patch-series. That's actually a good practice for new
development, and it might not make sense to have literally
one-build-per-commit.

Maybe I'd enable auto-builds for maintenance/bugfixes branches, and on
other (experimental/devel) branches only auto-build commits selected
explicitly (tagged?).

cheers,


martin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: Git Vs. Svn for a project which *must* distribute binari..., Martin Langhoff, (Mon Jun 4, 6:29 pm)
Re: Git Vs. Svn for a project which *must* distribute binari..., Johannes Schindelin, (Mon Jun 4, 10:56 pm)
Re: Git Vs. Svn for a project which *must* distribute binari..., Johannes Schindelin, (Mon Jun 4, 10:58 am)
speck-geostationary