Re: package and testing rant (was Re: package.el, auto-installation, and auto-removal)

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
>> Cc: nferrier@ferrier.me.uk,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:18:18 -0500
>> 
>> >> Note that there is a fair bit a pressure to *add* rather than remove
>> >> magic steps (the first candidate in the list is to build the *.info
>> >> files from the *.texi files).
>> > I hope we will be able to resist that pressure.
>> 
>> Why?  Having to keep the .info files in the Git is not good.
>
> Not good for whom?  For users it _is_ good, because it saves them from
> the annoyance to have Texinfo of the "right" version installed on
> their systems.

Git is not "for users".  It is for developers.  Make does not work
reliably when generated files are checked into Git because Git does not
tamper with the file creation dates: those are the dates of the
checkout.

For "users" it is important that the _tarballs_ contain some of the
generated files.

-- 
David Kastrup