CoCoA » CoCoALib

The code Ulrich submitted used the -p flag when copying.
This may be useful to indicate to people when files were last changed.

I wonder whether the Makefile in each directory should have atarget to produce a list of the files which should be there.
In my examples/ directory I have a lot of "junk" files (e.g. prototypes) which should not be made public (not yet!)

Rediscovered this issue by chance...
I'm convinced by the "preserve" flag change already made.

I am unconvinced by shell globbing because it might too easy copy "junk" it should not.
On the other hand writing out explicitly which files to copy means more future maintenance
as new source files are added. Really the best solution seems to be to have a single
explicit list somewhere, and use this list for makefile and the release script, etc.

Probably the simplest is to have a make target which prints out the list.
An alternative could be a separate "sources" file which can be read by both make and bash.

John Abbott wrote:

I'm convinced by the "preserve" flag change already made.

I agree

I am unconvinced by shell globbing because it might too easy copy "junk" it should not.
On the other hand writing out explicitly which files to copy means more future maintenance as new source files are added.

My point is that a release should be made from a clean copy of CVS. I use a clean directory to make all checks of consistency in what is CVS-public, and of course I have a personal working copy with all my work-in-progress/experimental code.
I think this double environment keeps the development and CVS safe, and I easily see which files are public (in the snapshot directory) and which are not (in my directory).

Therefore, what is in CVS is what goes in the public release. We could even add to the script the creation of a new clean copy of CVS (it used to be like that!), but that make the release process slower (if you make all the complilations and checks) or less safe (if you just assemble the release directory).

Really the best solution seems to be to have a single
explicit list somewhere, and use this list for makefile and the release script, etc.

Probably the simplest is to have a make target which prints out the list.
An alternative could be a separate "sources" file which can be read by both make and bash.

I'm not entirely convinced, but not strongly opposed. The make target seems a good idea.