Bitkeeper is no longer free for open source projects, sadly.

-Fab

From: Sean Hefty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:41 AM
To: Fab Tillier; Alex Naslednikov; Smith, Stan; Ishai Rabinovitz
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [ofw] WDK build environment migration thoughts

Once we confirm that building in the WDK works, is there any reason to keep 
supporting the DDK?  I would expect support for the DDK should only be required 
while some components don't build under the WDK.

I say absolutely not.  Supporting the DDK means another at least another dozen 
builds that must all be tested.

It sounds like the __ptr64 patch failed to meet its objective if 32/64 support 
is broken.  Just deleting the __ptr64 attribute would have accomplished the 
same end result and been 'cleaner'.

I agree.

Also, in the future please make patches more digestible - there's no reason 
ConnectX bug fixes should have been part of this - they should have been a 
separate check in.  Having so many changes intermingled, while easier for you 
to publish, makes it *much* harder to digest.  Likewise, the __ptr64 change 
should have been done independently of the WDK changes (especially since it 
introduced a regression).  Your patch touched 3500+ lines of code.

Just because SVN completely sucks for patch management doesn't mean that we 
need to make patch blob check-ins standard practice.  We really need to look at 
alternative tools for Windows that make this easier for developers.  Wasn't 
Mellanox testing git internally?  What about bitkeeper, is that any better?

- Sean
_______________________________________________
ofw mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw

Reply via email to