Programmers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm against compiled stuff going into version control, specially when it comes to compiled binaries, however, my principles are now in question after adding doxygen support for a project.

Should the hundreds of files generated by doxygen go into version control?, what is the recommended practice here?, I think the ideal would be automating the process in a server that publishes that documentation at the same time, however, there is no such server now nor there will be for some time.

share|improve this question
Ask yourself: What value does it add, and what does it cost? In general, it clutters repo history forever, and builds (including the documentation) should be reproducable by a single command anyway, so there ought to be little value. Plus, you can host the documentation on a shared network drive or something. – delnan Nov 13 '12 at 21:37
up vote 17 down vote accepted


Keep everything that you need to rebuild anything else. If it's auto-generated then you can go back to any point in the history of your repository and build it again. Why keep it?

share|improve this answer
Bingo. Anything you can generate should be treated like object code and should go away when you make clean. – Blrfl Nov 13 '12 at 21:47

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.