← Back to team overview

kicad-developers team mailing list archive

Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] [Build] No need to use the source tree for temporary files.

 

On 9/21/2016 1:33 PM, Niki Guldbrand wrote:
> On ons, 2016-09-21 at 12:32 +0200, jp charras wrote:
>> Le 21/09/2016 à 00:21, Niki Guldbrand a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>> * Move the generated PNG and temporary files to the build tree, but
>>>   keep the generated c files in the source tree for easier
>>>   addition/updates in tree.
>>> * Syncronize .gitignore to the changes.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Niki Guldbrand <niki.guldbrand@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  .gitignore                 | 2 --
>>>  bitmaps_png/CMakeLists.txt | 5 ++---
>>>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> I agree for temporary files.
>>
>> I fully disagree to move generated PNG files to the build tree.
>>
>> As a icon maintainer and a menu/toolbar maintainer, I am very *happy*
>> to easily find them in source
>> tree, for instance when I want to create a new icon, or choose an
>> existing icon for a new menu item.
>>
>> Build tree is subject to be deleted, not files in source tree.
>>
> Well they are still available, you just have to look in the build tree
> instead, so in my view it's a none issue, as they will be recreated if
> needed.

I think you will have the support of the bitmap maintainers if you do
this.  This would be a huge improvement over the current method of
creating the png cpp files.  The only issue is that there will be some
cmake maintenance when adding and removing bitmaps.  If this were in
place, I might even take on some png maintenance. :)

> 
> And you still have the source files avalible (svg), to look at.
> I was even considering removing the 'if( MAINTAIN_PNGS ) all together,
> and replace it with something that lookes if the cpp file was older
> than the svg,vand in that case regenerate the cpp file and not keep the
> png's around.
> 
> I'm also considering moving the svg's to the resources folder, because
> they are resources, and not source files, but that may just be my view.
> 
This probably makes sense but I don't have a strong opinion about this.


References