From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24970 invoked by alias); 9 Apr 2014 01:49:20 -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 24783 invoked by uid 89); 9 Apr 2014 01:49:18 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mail-bk0-f51.google.com Received: from mail-bk0-f51.google.com (HELO mail-bk0-f51.google.com) (209.85.214.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 09 Apr 2014 01:49:17 +0000 Received: by mail-bk0-f51.google.com with SMTP id 6so1687833bkj.38 for ; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 18:49:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.52.104 with SMTP id s8mr4981741lbo.7.1397008153309; Tue, 08 Apr 2014 18:49:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.184.129 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Apr 2014 18:49:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201404071452.s37EqLB9024528@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> References: <53406399.9050303@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20140406191404.GC7558@drone.musicnaut.iki.fi> <20140407035120.GA4186@adacore.com> <201404071452.s37EqLB9024528@glazunov.sibelius.xs4all.nl> Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 01:49:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Vendor branches on sourceware.org's binutils-gdb repo From: Matt Rice To: Mark Kettenis Cc: matz@suse.de, Joel Brobecker , aaro.koskinen@iki.fi, Sergio Durigan Junior , emachado@linux.vnet.ibm.com, GDB , Binutils , bergner@vnet.ibm.com, tuliom@linux.vnet.ibm.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg00023.txt.bz2 On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Mark Kettenis wrote: >> Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 16:27:22 +0200 (CEST) >> From: Michael Matz >> >> Hi, >> >> On Sun, 6 Apr 2014, Joel Brobecker wrote: >> >> > > I think it's very useful for users to have all vendor branches in a >> > > single repository. At least with glibc this has helped me a lot (as a >> > > user) when identifying and cherry-picking needed fixes to my own >> > > systems. >> > >> > FWIW: I have found that the extra branches are just making me download >> > lots of commits that I have no use for, and I suspect that this is the >> > case for many of us. That's the default behavior, and most users will be >> > impacted by those. While it's convenient, it is also very easy to pull a >> > branch from another repository. >> >> But it's not necessarily easy for the vendor to _host_ that other >> repository. > > Really? Are there really companies that are active in the Free > Software community that don't have the infrastructure to host a > relatively small git repo? I generally prefer working in the distributed model, but I think it makes sense for sourceware to host it, for copyright assignment purposes it makes it clear and easy to decide if effort on a branch can be merged by a third party into master, which happens on occasion. I would probably be happier if there was a separate repository binutils+gdb-vendor.git or some such though.