Author lemburg
Recipients barry, benjamin.peterson, lemburg, mdk, pitrou, xdegaye
Date 2017-12-27.09:37:55
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <481bce7a-1746-1e58-f410-30e37f88a06f@egenix.com>
In-reply-to <1514330684.71.0.213398074469.issue32429@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
Content
On 27.12.2017 00:24, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> 
> Antoine Pitrou <pitrou@free.fr> added the comment:
> 
>> +1 - do you have any thoughts on that?
> 
> I think the current scheme may have been useful at a time where DVCS didn't exist.  You would maintain an unversioned copy of Modules/Setup.dist in your work-tree.  Nowadays you can fork a github repo and maintain your own branch with changes to a tracked file.  I don't think Modules/Setup deserves special treatment compared to, say, setup.py or Makefile.pre.in.

The file is mostly meant for people using tar balls rather than
checkouts to give them an easy way back to default settings
after making changes to the Modules/Setup file.

The same could be had by having Makefile.pre.in generate Setup.dist
from Setup while booting into build mode, avoiding the need to
sometimes create Modules/Setup manually.
History
Date User Action Args
2017-12-27 09:37:56lemburgsetrecipients: + lemburg, barry, pitrou, benjamin.peterson, xdegaye, mdk
2017-12-27 09:37:56lemburglinkissue32429 messages
2017-12-27 09:37:55lemburgcreate