就个人而言，这取决于:

为什么pod应该是repo的一部分(在源代码控制下)并且不应该被忽略

The source is identical You can build it right away as is (even without the cocoapods) Even if a pod is deleted, we still have its copy (Yes, this can happen and it did. In an old project where you want just a small change you would need to implement a new library to be able to even build). pods.xcodeproj settings are part of the source control as well. This means e.g. if you have the project in swift 4, but some pods must be in swift 3.2 because they are not updated yet, these settings will be saved. Otherwise the one who cloned the repo would end up with errors. You can always delete pods from the project and run pod install, the opposite can not be done. Even the authors of the Cocoapods recommend it.

缺点:更大的存储库，令人困惑的差异(主要针对团队成员)，潜在的冲突更多。

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.

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。

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。

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.