我已经做了几个月的iOS开发了,刚刚了解到有前途的用于依赖管理的CocoaPods库。

我在一个个人项目中尝试过:在我的Podfile中添加了对Kiwi的依赖,运行pod install CocoaPodsTest。Xcodeproj,瞧,它工作得很好。

我唯一想知道的是:我要签入什么,为了版本控制我要忽略什么?似乎很明显,我想签入Podfile本身,也可能是.xcworkspace文件;但是我是否忽略了Pods/目录?是否还会生成其他文件(当我添加其他依赖项时),也应该添加到.gitignore中?


当前回答

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.

其他回答

我更喜欢与Podfile和Podfile一起提交Pods目录。锁定,以确保我的团队中的任何人都可以随时签出源代码,他们不必担心任何事情或做额外的事情来使其工作。

如果您在某个pod中修复了一个错误,或者根据需要修改了一些行为,但如果没有提交,这些更改将无法在其他机器上使用,那么这也会有所帮助。

忽略不必要的目录:

xcuserdata/

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。

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。

我建议使用GitHub的Objective-C gitignore。 具体来说,最佳实践是:

Podfile必须始终处于源代码控制之下。 Podfile。Lock必须始终处于源代码控制之下。 CocoaPods生成的工作区应该保持在源代码控制之下。 任何使用:path选项引用的Pod都应该保存在源代码控制下。 ./Pods文件夹可以保存在源代码控制下。

要了解更多信息,您可以参考官方指南。

来源:我是CocoaPods核心团队的成员,就像@alloy一样


尽管Pods文件夹是一个构建工件,但在决定是否将其置于源代码控制之下时,您可能会考虑以下原因:

CocoaPods is not a package manager so the original source of the library could be removed in future by the author. If the Pods folder is included in source control, it is not necessary to install CocoaPods to run the project as the checkout would suffice. CocoaPods is still work in progress and there are options which don’t always lead to the same result (for example the :head and the :git options currently are not using the commits stored in the Podfile.lock). There are less points of failure if you might resume work on a project after a medium/long amount of time.