This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: git is live
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>, Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, gdb <gdb at sourceware dot org>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom at linux dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:55:04 -0800
- Subject: Re: git is live
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <877gd5iyaz dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <1382709091 dot 5918 dot 9 dot camel at otta> <CAKOQZ8xh2L_D-gdX2wG7TT0c-r6q4=QXqqFHiUq2WPO-3b3t-Q at mail dot gmail dot com> <5284ACD1 dot 8090609 at arm dot com> <20131114111140 dot GF12772 at adacore dot com> <83r4ajym3z dot fsf at gnu dot org>
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Eli Zaretskii <email@example.com> wrote:
>> From: Joel Brobecker <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> 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.
> Obviously, this discussion only has sense if the branch is hosted by
> sourceware. Otherwise, what could we do to prevent J. R. Hacker from
> publishing a branch from her own machine?
Nothing. But I don't see why that matters.
I'm mildly in favor of permitting vendor branches on gcc.gnu.org for a
different reason: it encourages vendors with GCC extensions to make
those extensions readily available to everybody. If we require
vendors to handle their own hosting, we will inevitably have some who
simply decide not to bother.