From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20618 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2013 11:12:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 20599 invoked by uid 89); 14 Nov 2013 11:12:32 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from Unknown (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 11:11:51 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE4B4116706; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 06:12:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 6Olw9RA3wxc3; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 06:12:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 099031166FE; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 06:12:14 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 82624E1804; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 15:11:40 +0400 (RET) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 11:12:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Richard Earnshaw Cc: Ian Lance Taylor , Peter Bergner , Tom Tromey , GDB Development , Binutils Development , Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho Subject: Re: git is live Message-ID: <20131114111140.GF12772@adacore.com> References: <877gd5iyaz.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <1382709091.5918.9.camel@otta> <5284ACD1.8090609@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5284ACD1.8090609@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2013-11/txt/msg00065.txt.bz2 > > GCC has always allowed vendor branches. I don't see any reason that > > binutils/gdb should prohibit them. Obviously all the code has to be > > under the GPL or some other explicitly permitted license. > > I believe the GCC policy is that the code must also be assigned to the > FSF, just as it would be for trunk. Outside of the policy, I am starting to rethink the policy of allowing vendor branches. For centralized version control systems such as SVN, it makes sense, because there is no other choice. But for decentralized systems such as git, I think vendor branches could be just as easily hosted elsewhere. With git, it's really easy for anyone to host it somewhere, and publish its location. It's also equally easy for anyone interested in the work to add that location a remote, and fetch from it. We could allow exceptions on a case-by-case basis; for instance we'd allow it if some contributor was constrained by his employer. But otherwise, everyone who uses the default "fetch" ends up fetching everything, including vendor branches that they are not interested in. -- Joel