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

Wrong build instructions in README #270

Closed
hferentschik opened this issue May 11, 2017 · 3 comments · Fixed by #271
Closed

Wrong build instructions in README #270

hferentschik opened this issue May 11, 2017 · 3 comments · Fixed by #271

Comments

@hferentschik
Copy link
Contributor

From the README:

For ordinary use, go build ./... is sufficient.

When developing this library, please use make to take advantage of the tests and validation.

That is not quite correct, if you check out the source, you will first need to run make vendor before being able to run go build.

On this note I am wondering why the actual go build is not integrated into the Makefile, depending on vendor. In fact, imo it should be the default target.

You should be able to checkout the sources and run make and everything gets bootstrapped and compiled.

@mtrmac
Copy link
Collaborator

mtrmac commented May 11, 2017

Thanks for pointing this out, the instructions definitely need changing.

Though, it's not entirely obvious what is the right thing to say in there: containers/image is a library-only package, so building it separately does not give the user anything immediately useful, whatever the build instructions are. Adding a default make target AFAICT does not change this.

We could provide some instructions for integrating the library into a caller.

Or we could just point at skopeo and tell users to try building that instead to have something to experiment with.

I guess, preferably, both?

@hferentschik
Copy link
Contributor Author

so building it separately does not give the user anything immediately useful,

Sure, but what's about development? Would it not make sense for development purposes to have the build part of the Makefile.

Consumers will indeed not see any of this.

@mtrmac
Copy link
Collaborator

mtrmac commented May 11, 2017

Sure, but what's about development? Would it not make sense for development purposes to have the build part of the Makefile.

For development, the current default (get all tools, run tests) broadly makes sense. Sure, adding a go build ./... step in there to catch subpackages with no tests would be great; I currently use go build ./... && make as my primary compile/test step, and folding that into a simple make would be better.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants