Dan Mick writes: > Richard Lowe wrote: > > James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> Mark J. Nelson writes: > >>> I think an upstream sync necessarily implies pulling the current upstream > >>> source, integrating your changes, and building it OUTSIDE of the context > >>> of ON. Anything else is negligent. Including the unused-in-ON code > >>> provides no benefits that are immediately obvious to me. > >> +1. > >> > >> It creates an ever-increasing amount of flotsam in the gate, and thus > >> a storage and time penalty that every single ON-based workspace must > >> pay. It's waste with benefit to few -- and likely nobody at all. > >> > > > > And it would make tag searches, cscope, opengrok, etc, needlessly noisy, if > > these are actual source files. That alone is bad enough, in my view. > > OTOH, it means you're more likely to understand other-platform effects of any > changes you may be contemplating by looking at an ON workspace...
If you're doing anything that can affect other platforms, then you should probably be doing that work with the original upstream sources, and then reintegrating. Doing it with the ON sources -- that've been rearranged and tweaked to fit ON's build environment -- means that you're missing all of the portability bits. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
