Need help with package maintenance

Marcus Harnisch writes: No. If we really don't use them (note the difference from "not really using"!) in creating an XEmacs package, we can throw them away. However, in general we check in all the upstream source even if we don't use it -- we could and should save a few lines in ls output by throwing away all the generated files, though. We do not legally have to distribute files that are in CVS but are not used in generating the package, but we usually do (in xemacs-packages/etc/mmm/). No, we do not have to and do not want to check them in. Courtesy copy; usually we rename to INSTALL.upstream. If we distribute this, we should distribute the sources of the build machinery, too. The renaming probably should be done for any courtesy copies of sources of build scripts. If we distribute the upstream Makefile, we must distribute Makefile.am. I would prefer to not check in and not distribute Makefile and Makefile.in if they are not used in our build process. If we include configure, we must include the above; they are corresponding sources. If we include only configure.in, it would be rather rude (but legal) to omit them. Again, if we don't use it, I would not check in and not distribute the generated configure file. This is probably a MMM-specific script that the Makefile calls. Doesn't look generated. Check in and/or distribute if and only if we check in and/or distribute Makefile.am. More autotools junk, I think. Check in and distribute if and only if we distribute Makefile.am. This might be a file generated to make completion of some stage of the build. If so, we do not want to check it in or distribute it. What's in it? _______________________________________________ XEmacs-Beta mailing list XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta