Having the work in-tree also makes it easier to use the standard Mozilla tools to keep up: bug tagging, try servers, awfy, tbpl, etc. I think that's a substantial win for the MIPS team (and the code they maintain) even if it comes with utter disregard from the core SpiderMonkey hackers.
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Jim Blandy <[email protected]> wrote: > Please don't misunderstand --- I think the relationship can certainly be a > success. It'll just take more attention from the SpiderMonkey team than > they seem to expect. > > > On 02/13/2014 05:53 AM, Petar Jovanovic wrote: > >> I will disagree with the above, since having multiple forks instead of >> one repo has been proven to be inefficient in multiple opensource >> projects, as it duplicates a lot of engineering effort for rebasing >> and important, misses to leverage wisdom of more people working on the >> same project. >> > I think many of the same disadvantages will accrue here, if most of the > Mozilla team ignores the effects of their changes on the MIPS support. > > > > It also brings up confusion to the community. >> > Certainly, as a demonstration of commitment, having the changes in-tree is > much better. I only want to point out the tension between that commitment > and the "tier 3" designation. > > > _______________________________________________ > dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals > _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
