In article <20110819113153.ga5...@britannica.bec.de>, Joerg Sonnenberger <jo...@britannica.bec.de> wrote: >On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 10:55:20AM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote: >> Every project I know off makes changes locally first and then pushes >> them upstream. It is not practical to wait for upstream to be fixed >> first, specially in cases of security fixes. In some cases we >> maintain many thousands of lines of diff just because upstream will >> not take them, and the version control systems do a pretty decent >> job merging new vendor branches. > >This is just ignorant of the fact that a number of NetBSD developer >maintain projects where they also have upstream commit access. As such >you are doing nothing but increasing the maintainance cost. Stop making >it harder. Silly GCC warnings fall into this category.
It is 6 of one half a dozen of the other. I maintain file in the tree and out of the tree and I find changes coming in from all places. If we want to treat packages with upstream access differently, then perhaps we should do so, but I don't think it is worth it. christos