Hi,
Hmmm, perhaps an optional command-line switch (invoked by release managers)
might be useful for cases where excluding .po and .md files would be useful
(for example, if the space is tight). Without this command-line switch
specified, add-on bundles would include everything like what we have now.
Mick or Jamie (and others), any thoughts on this?
Cheers,
Joseph
-----Original Message-----
From: nvda-addons-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:nvda-addons-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Noelia
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 3:35 AM
To: nvda-addons@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [nvda-addons] Re: Proposal: excluding .po and .md files when
building add-on packages
I disagree.
If Python files are not excluded, I think that po and md files shouldn't be
excluded for consistancy.
NVDA excludes the source code in binaries, but add-ons are smaller and the
source code allows modifications and learning about development.
Furthermore, if some files are excluded, perhaps detailed documentation
about building add-ons from source is required, and perhaps the readme of
add-on template is not enough.
I remember a similar discussion time ago.
Thanks.
El 26/02/2016 a las 12:16, Joseph Lee escribió:
Hi all,----------------------------------------------------------------
When NVDA is compiled, various nvda.po files are excluded, leaving
only .mo files. Same applies to readme - .t2t files are excluded,
leaving .html files. This results in significant disk space savings.
Id like to propose that a modification to addonTemplate/sconstruct be
made to exclude .po and .md files starting with our upcoming
spring/fall quarterly maintenance releases. Thanks.
Cheers,
Joseph
