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。

理论上，您应该在Pods目录中进行检查。在实践中，这并不总是有效的。许多pod都超过了github文件的大小限制，所以如果你使用github，你将会在检查pods目录时遇到问题。

我通常在客户端的应用程序上工作。在这种情况下，我也将Pods目录添加到repo中，以确保在任何给定的时间，任何开发人员都可以进行签出、构建和运行。

如果这是我们自己的应用程序，我可能会排除Pods目录，直到我有一段时间不会使用它。

事实上，我必须得出结论，相对于纯用户的观点，我可能不是回答你的问题的最佳人选:)我会在https://twitter.com/CocoaPodsOrg上发布关于这个问题的推文。

就我个人而言，我不检查Pods目录和内容。我不能说我花了很长时间来考虑这些影响，但我的推理是这样的:

Podfile引用了每个依赖项的特定标记或提交，因此pod本身可以从Podfile生成，因此它们更像一个中间构建产品而不是源代码，因此，在我的项目中不需要版本控制。

Cocoapod文档中直接给出了答案。你可以看看“http://guides.cocoapods.org/using/using-cocoapods.html#should-i-ignore-the-pods-directory-in-source-control”。

Whether or not you check in your Pods folder is up to you, as workflows vary from project to project. We recommend that you keep the Pods directory under source control, and don't add it to your .gitignore. But ultimately this decision is up to you: Benefits of checking in the Pods directory After cloning the repo, the project can immediately build and run, even without having CocoaPods installed on the machine. There is no need to run pod install, and no Internet connection is necessary. The Pod artifacts (code/libraries) are always available, even if the source of a Pod (e.g. GitHub) were to go down. The Pod artifacts are guaranteed to be identical to those in the original installation after cloning the repo. Benefits of ignoring the Pods directory 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.

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.