On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 04:03:19AM +0100, Roland Mainz wrote: > Grumpf... I explained that earlier. Short: The patches generated from > the upstream sources will no longer apply and we would need to create a > bullet-proof way to handle "missing" files (which will not be easy
Am I correct in thinking that your concerns around removing these files are entirely a result of a belief that the structure of the code should be optimised for bulk upgrades from an external source base? It does also seem that there are several separate issues here - for example, we already have the DTrace Test Suite in ON (and other tests as well), which is not normally referenced during a build but which is absolutely relevant to the source *that is built and delivered*. Clearly, including in the gate tools which are used only for testing is an acceptable practice within reason. But I'd like to be sure I'm understanding the origin of your strong opposition to removing files such as makefiles which are in no way related to the binaries that are actually delivered by building your project's bits. -- Keith M Wesolowski "Sir, we're surrounded!" FishWorks "Excellent; we can attack in any direction!"
