Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Integrate build scripts with whatwg/html. #3

Closed
mikewest opened this issue Aug 31, 2015 · 4 comments
Closed

Integrate build scripts with whatwg/html. #3

mikewest opened this issue Aug 31, 2015 · 4 comments

Comments

@mikewest
Copy link
Member

It seems strange to me that the build scripts are separate from the only source file that will ever use them. I'd suggest integrating them with the main HTML repository (perhaps in a build/ subdirectory) so that symlinks or copying of source files is no longer a necessary step in the process.

@domenic
Copy link
Member

domenic commented Aug 31, 2015

I'm pretty strongly against this. Source repository history should not be intermingled with build tool revisions.

I tried to make it pretty clear from the

TODO: Don't require throwing everything into one directory before doing the build; instead, let the source and cldr-data be in seperate directories, and the output be put in another directory.

in the readme that the hacks you need to do here are a temporary state of affairs. That TODO is my preferred solution here.

@mikewest
Copy link
Member Author

If it seemed like this system would be used for other documents (a la
Bikeshed), I think I'd agree with you. But given that there are no other
consumers of the scripts, they're fairly tightly tied to the source
document, and vice versa. What's the harm in tying the histories together?

@domenic
Copy link
Member

domenic commented Aug 31, 2015

It seems much less clean than what I propose, for no real gain. My modular version allows e.g. creation of a web service which takes as input the source repository, whereas mingling the files together would mean you'd have to extract out only the source files before sending them to such a service.

@domenic
Copy link
Member

domenic commented Sep 3, 2015

Going in the direction outlined in #15 instead. I am pretty confident it will be a nice experience when it's all ready, especially combined with #10 :).

@domenic domenic closed this as completed Sep 3, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants