最后取决于你采取的方法。

Cocoapods团队是这么想的:

是否检查您的Pods文件夹取决于您，因为 工作流程因项目而异。我们建议您保留 pod目录下的源代码控制，不要将它添加到您的 .gitignore。但最终这个决定取决于你。

就我个人而言，我想把Pods排除在外，如果我使用Node，就像node_modules，如果我使用Bower，就像bower_components。这适用于几乎所有的依赖管理器，也是git子模块背后的理念。

然而，有时你可能想要真正确定某个依赖项的最新状态，这样你才能在项目中拥有该依赖项。当然，如果您这样做，会有一些缺点，但这些问题不仅适用于Cocoapods，而且适用于任何依赖管理器。

下面是Cocoapods团队制作的利弊清单，以及之前提到的引文全文。

Cocoapods团队:我应该将Pods目录检入源代码控制吗?

将“Pods”目录作为一个git子模块/单独的项目似乎是一种很好的结构方式，原因如下。

在项目回购中使用pod，当与多个开发人员一起工作时，可能会在pull请求中造成非常大的差异，几乎不可能看到人们更改的实际工作(想象一下库更改了数百到数千个文件，而实际项目中只更改了少数文件)。 我看到了不向git提交任何东西的问题，因为拥有库的人可以随时删除它，而你实际上是SOL，这也解决了这个问题。

我属于不签入库的开发人员阵营，假设我们在其他位置有一个好的副本可用。因此，在我的.gitignore中，我包含了以下针对CocoaPods的行:

Pods/
#Podfile.lock  # changed my mind on Podfile.lock

Then I make sure that we have a copy of the libraries in a safe location. Rather than (mis-)use a project's code repository to store dependencies (compiled or not) I think the best way to do this is to archive builds. If you use a CI server for your builds (such as Jenkins) you can permanently archive any builds that are important to you. If you do all your production builds in your local Xcode, make a habit of taking an archive of your project for any builds you need to keep. Something like: 1. Product --> Archive

分配……提交到iOS应用商店/保存为企业或Ad-hoc部署/等等 在Finder中显示您的项目文件夹 右键压缩WhateverProject

这提供了整个项目的构建映像，包括用于构建应用程序的完整项目和工作区设置，以及二进制发行版(如Sparkle，专有sdk，如TestFlight等)，无论他们是否使用CocoaPods。

更新:我已经改变了我的想法，现在提交Podfile。锁定源代码控制。然而，我仍然相信pod本身是构建工件，应该在源代码控制之外进行管理，通过另一种方法，如CI服务器或如上所述的存档过程。

不签入pod /版本控制的优点(按重要性的主观顺序):

Much easier to merge commits, and review code diffs. Merging is a common source of issues in a code base, and this allows you to focus only on things that are pertinent. It's impossible for some random contributor to edit the dependencies themselves and check the changes in, which they should never do (and again would be hard to identify if the diff is massive). Editing dependencies is very bad practice because a future pod install could occlude the changes. Discrepancies between the Podfile and the Pods/ directory are found quicker among teammates. If you check in Pods/ and, for example, update a version in the Podfile, but forget to run pod install or check in the changes to Pods/, you will have a much harder time noticing the source of the discrepancy. If Pods/ isn't checked in, you always need to run pod install anyway. Smaller repo size. Having a smaller byte-footprint is nice, but that doesn't matter much in the grand scheme. More importantly: having more things in the repo also increases your cognitive load. There is no reason to have things in the repo that you shouldn't be looking at. Refer to documentation (the abstraction) to know how something works, not at code (the implementation). Easier to discern how much someone contributes (since their lines of code contributed won't include dependencies they didn't write) JAR files, .venv/ (virtual environments), and node_modules/ are never included in version control. If we were completely agnostic about the question, not checking in Pods would be the default based on precedent.

不检查pod的缺点/

切换分支或还原提交时必须运行pod install。 您不能仅仅通过克隆存储库来运行项目。您必须安装pod工具，然后运行pod install。 你必须有互联网连接才能运行pod install，而且pod的源代码必须可用。 如果依赖的所有者删除了他们的包，你就不能使用它(尽管你一开始就不应该使用已弃用的依赖——这只会迫使你更早地进行依赖卫生)。

总之，不包含Pods目录是防止更多不良做法的屏障。包含Pods目录可以使项目更容易运行。比起后者，我更喜欢前者。如果一开始就不存在犯某些错误的可能性，那么你就不需要向项目中的每个新人汇报“什么不能做”。我也喜欢有一个单独的版本控制Pods的想法，这减轻了缺点。

我必须说，我是将pod提交到存储库的粉丝。按照前面提到的链接，你会得到一个很好的。gitignore文件来启动你的iOS Xcode项目，以允许Pods，但如果你愿意，你也可以轻松地排除它们:https://github.com/github/gitignore/blob/master/Objective-C.gitignore

我之所以热衷于将pod添加到存储库中，有一个根本原因，但似乎没有人注意到，如果我们的项目如此依赖的库突然从网络上删除了，会发生什么?

Maybe the host decides they no longer want to keep their GitHub account open What happens if the library is say several years old (like older than 5 years for example) there is a high risk the project may no longer be available at source Also another point, what happens if the URL to the repository changes? Lets say the person serving the Pod from their GitHub account, decides to represent themselves under a different handle - your Pods URLs are going to break. Finally another point. Say if you're a developer like me who does a lot of coding when on a flight between countries. I do a quick pull on the 'master' branch, do a pod install on that branch, while sitting in the airport and have myself all set for the upcoming 8 hour flight. I get 3 hours into my flight, and realise I need to switch to another branch.... 'DOH' - missing Pod information which is only available on the 'master' branch.

NB……请注意，用于开发的“主”分支只是举个例子，很明显，版本控制系统中的“主”分支应该保持干净，并且在任何时候都可以部署/构建

我认为从这些方面来看，在代码存储库中创建快照肯定比严格限制存储库大小要好。如前所述，播客文件。锁文件-而版本控制将给你一个良好的Pod版本历史。

在一天结束的时候，如果你有一个紧迫的截止日期，预算紧张，时间是至关重要的——我们需要尽可能多的资源，不要把时间浪费在严格的意识形态上，而是利用一套工具一起工作——让我们的生活更容易、更有效。

是否检入Pods文件夹取决于您，因为工作流程因项目而异。我们建议您将Pods目录置于源代码控制之下，不要将其添加到.gitignore中。但最终这个决定取决于你:

签入Pods目录的好处

克隆repo之后，项目可以立即构建和运行，甚至不需要在机器上安装CocoaPods。不需要运行pod install，也不需要连接互联网。 Pod构件(代码/库)总是可用的，即使Pod的源(例如GitHub)宕机。 克隆repo后，Pod工件保证与原始安装中的工件相同。

忽略Pods目录的好处

The source control repo will be smaller and take up less space. As long as the sources (e.g. GitHub) for all Pods are available, CocoaPods is generally able to recreate the same installation.(Technically there is no guarantee that running pod install will fetch and recreate identical artifacts when not using a commit SHA in the Podfile. This is especially true when using zip files in the Podfile.) There won't be any conflicts to deal with when performing source control operations, such as merging branches with different Pod versions. Whether or not you check in the Pods directory, the Podfile and Podfile.lock should always be kept under version control.