This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sourceware.org mailing list for the crossgcc project.

See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: ct-ng -> git repos instead of single patches


On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 09:22, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
> * Esben Haabendal <esben@haabendal.dk> wrote:
>> Having integrated ct-ng into a build system, I also find the current
>> patch system easy to handle for local changes.
>
> I completely disagree here. These local changes still have to be
> extracted to patches, and these patches have to be put into the
> proper places. If ct-ng would take it's sources from git, all one
> needs to do is to change the ref name.

You may disagree, but others WOULD agree that it's easy to handle.
It's their choice.  Spreading git sounds a bit like missionary work :)

Of the others who do agree that patches are KISS, and who want an
atomic "handoff" that says "10 years from now, this binary spool will
still work without need of an external site, firewall access, or
networking", you're trying to make that choice for them.

Take for example the handoffs of Bulverde toolchains -- in keeping
with their GPL obligations, intel used to offer a full download and/or
media completely including an approved, supported toolchain; your
change makes that impossible (I can explain in detail why strawman
arguments of "perpetual git server" and "abandonware clause" are bad
ideas).  (FWIW, "used to offer": intel doesn't offer that anymore
because Marvell bought the product line)

Adopting git means that the company's existing SCM is valueless (they
kept it for a reason -- other SCMs do offer things git doesn't have),
and they need to approve/maintain/support it plus regularly sync
in/out form their current SCM.

So your change both forces that choice to switch to git, and means
that GPL obligations are more difficult or impossible.  This would be
a masterstroke if this was the FSF seeding new GPL disputes :)    (OK,
I'm kidding on that one!  ow!  quit swatting!)

Still recommend as an OPTION, not as a requirement.

Allan
(sorry for the two cases of SHOUTING but I wanted to add
ASCII-friendly emphasis)
-- 
allanc@chickenandporn.com "éé" http://linkedin.com/in/goldfish

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]