On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 01:42:20PM -0400, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 24 October 2014 12:17, Konstantin Belousov <kostik...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I remember the main reason for keeping oldnfs, both server and client,
> > around in HEAD was to facilitate MFC of fixes to the branches which
> > still use oldnfs, i.e. stable/8.  If this reason is still valid, oldnfs
> > have to stay in HEAD till stable/8 is supported or interested for
> > developers.
> >
> > I usually do not like direct commits into the stable branches.
> > Otherwise, I see no reason to keep oldnfs around.
> I only see real value in that if we're actually building and testing
> it on HEAD on a regular basis though. If we don't build it by default
> on HEAD and don't generally test it there, I think we're actually
> worse off to commit changes to HEAD first and then MFC.

We do build both (old) nfsclient and nfsserver, at least as modules.
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to