On 2012-10-11 6:36 PM, Mike Hommey wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 06:14:51PM -0400, Ted Mielczarek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Ehsan Akhgari <ehsan.akhg...@gmail.com> wrote:
What I really don't want us to do is to prohibit people from fixing things
in the imported code. That is the absolute worst situation we can face with
a given piece of code, as we already have learned painfully.
This should absolutely be at the discretion of the maintainer of the
imported code in our tree. From personal experience, allowing local
changes to land in Breakpad before they are landed upstream has caused
huge headaches. Our in-tree copy of Breakpad was nearly 2 years
out-of-date because of a few large patches that landed in support of
OOP work and were difficult to upstream.
Same experience with jemalloc, which is why the rule is to have things
applied upstream first.
What is the nature of this problem? Is it the difficulty to reapply the
patches when pulling new code from upstream? Note that I'm mostly
talking about fixing small problems in our copy, not doing major
architectural changes.
Ehsan
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
