Mike Kupfer writes: > >>>>> "Jim" == James Carlson <james.d.carlson at sun.com> writes: > > Jim> Since we're not including gpyfm in the initial putback and we're > Jim> not planning to include it in an internal (or external) code > Jim> review, is there any objection to removing these two from the > Jim> depends-on list? > > In isolation, I'm okay with that. And we might as well downgrade their > priority, too (P5?). > > I'm a little concerned about the bigger picture, though. I guess we're > assuming folks will be able to use meld for a GUI merge tool. Which is > okay with me, as long as we're willing to gate our putback on > > 6648443 meld to be included into SFW consolidation
At least for 461, I see that as a separate problem. 461 is about internal review of the bits that we're delivering. Having a GUI is (I think) about making contributions from the outside more plausible than they are today. Otherwise, hg is no more or less bad than it is right now. And for that separate task, I agree that we ought to have something. I haven't used 'meld', but if it's popular enough, and the price is right, it sounds like that's a good answer. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson at sun.com> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
