[kaffe] perhaps we should include kaffe/po/*.gmo in cvs

Noa Resare noa at resare.com
Sun Sep 26 13:41:10 PDT 2004

In light of the recent build failure reports on the list relating to
building the po/*.gmo files I would like to suggest that we add those
files to the cvs repository.

.gmo files are binary files that are constructed from the
correpsonding .po files by the msgfmt tool (distributed with gettext).
The .gmo files are arch independent and in projects using autotools they
get included in source distribution tarballs. 

My argument for including the .gmo files in cvs:

- we include a lot of other redundant files (such as configure) to
eliminate the need for the full autoconf/automake toolchain when
compiling from cvs.

- by including it we would say that "getting kaffe from cvs will work as
a proper release from a build standpoint. You don't need a developers
toolchain unless you change anything". That would probably help testers
on various exotic platforms working on more essential problems.

- it doesn't occupy a lot of disk space

Arguments against:

- binary files in cvs kind of sucks

- it would put an additional burden on people checking in changes to .po

- (almost) everyone has msgfmt anyway.

- the rationale for including autotools generated files is that those
files are much more version sensitive than msgfmt. 

In this case I think that the benefits of easy compilation outweighs the
burden of maintenance and additional disk space requirements. What do
you people think?

Of course an even better solution would be to have cvs mainly for
changing developers, continuous tinderbox style regression testing on
key platforms and a time based release schedule but until that happens I
think we should do our best to make testing from cvs as easy as possible
for everyone.


ps. if someone decides to add .gmo to cvs, remember to add with binary
(-kb) option.

More information about the kaffe mailing list