> On Mar 23, 2016, at 12:52 AM, Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org> wrote: > > That's an awkward situation we've not run into before. > > If the code is going to live in the upstream Mesa git repository, then > it seems like the best long term plan is to reverse the workflow: make > upstream Mesa the canonical repository, do development upstream, and > pull changes from upstream into any internal repositories. > > Obviously, that's a huge process change - presumably you have a bunch > of people working in some Intel perforce system - but working in the > public is very beneficial. It's also the mark of a true open source > project, rather than simply "available source”.
While that situation would be nice, the swr rasterizer is a subset of an internal project, and what is upstreamed publicly is not just a straight copy of our repository. Moving to having the rasterizer’s “home” to Mesa involves some large technical and workflow challenges. -Tim _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
