[Ur] Best practices for Mercurial + autogeneration of files?

[Adam Chlipala]

I've finally gotten around to removing autogenerated files from the 
Mercurial repo.  Would anyone like to help me sanity-check the result?

I've put up a dry run of a source distribution here:
     http://www.impredicative.com/ur/urweb-test.tgz
It would be great if some folks could try building and installing from 
that tarball and let me know how it goes.

Also, the public Mercurial repository should now omit all autogenerated 
files.  It would be helpful to hear from people who manage to build and 
install from fresh clones of that repo, which lives at:
     http://hg.impredicative.com/urweb
If you notice any autogenerated files that still appear in a fresh 
clone, I'd be very glad to hear about them.

I think it's about time for a new Ur/Web release, so I'd also be 
interested to hear about any last important changes (not just about the 
issue in the subject of this message) that I've missed.  Thanks!

On 08/05/2013 07:27 PM, Jason Gross wrote:
> Do you know about/have you considered using `make dist` 
> (http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/automake.html#Basics-of-Distribution)? 
>  It does not currently work, failing with "cp: cannot create regular 
> file `urweb-20120925 + c8ecea593347 tip/m4/ax_check_openssl.m4': No 
> such file or directory".  However, when it works, it automatically 
> includes a number of common autogenerated files, including "configure".
>
> -Jason
>
> On Wednesday, July 17, 2013, Adam Chlipala wrote:
>
>     A few people have suggested changing the Ur/Web repository so that
>     autogenerated files like 'configure' are not included.  There's a
>     Mantis issue here:
>     http://www.impredicative.com/mantis/view.php?id=158
>
>     Here's my question, which is about an issue not addressed directly
>     in the text of that "bug report": What would be the best way to
>     package a version control snapshot as a source distribution?
>      Right now, I use the 'hg archive' command, which builds a tarball
>     directly from the repository.  There is no need to worry about
>     accidentally including generated files that should not be
>     distributed.  Would it be necessary to get much fancier, with a
>     'tar' filename blacklist or whitelist, if I want to distribute a
>     generated 'configure' file along with other sources drawn directly
>     from the repo?
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.impredicative.com/pipermail/ur/attachments/20131121/d865730a/attachment.html>