First, congratulations Junio, on taking over this stuff, and all the best.
Second, the killer argument, in the 'Recursive Make ... harmful' is the basic one that Recursive Makes breaks up the dependancy graph, and almost guarentees that it is wrong unless you do a lot of work to fix that artifact. Now git is small enough that make clean; make won't take too long but git is also a basis for other layers, so there is good reason to try to get it right.
-- mit freundlichen Grüßen, Brian.
Petr BaudisRe: Handover, Make
Dear diary, on Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 01:08:03AM CEST, I got a letter where Brian O'Mahoney <omb@khandalf.com> told me that...
> First, congratulations Junio, on taking over this stuff, and all the best. > > Second, the killer argument, in the 'Recursive Make ... harmful' is the > basic one that Recursive Makes breaks up the dependancy graph, and > almost guarentees that it is wrong unless you do a lot of work to fix > that artifact. Now git is small enough that make clean; make won't take > too long
I think there are basically none dependencies like this, or if they are any, they virtually never break under regular usage. At least I never do make clean and I never saw a rebuild of git to break.
I think especially for smaller projects recursive make is just fine and makes maintenance easier, and I think most of the arguments about the dependency graph rarely matter in real projects (especially ones of the size of git). So I'd say, keep it as it is till we can. :-)
> but git is also a basis for other layers, so there is good > reason to try to get it right.
For what layers?
-- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ If you want the holes in your knowledge showing up try teaching someone. -- Alan Cox