Re: Vendor branches on sourceware.org's binutils-gdb repo
Doug Evans <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gdb.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CADPb22SRGp2NSKGim6nwsLw+CJwZ6xJNPTNfJM+smfJ1PE577g@mail.gmail.com> |
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Stan Shebs <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4/5/14 1:12 PM, Edjunior Barbosa Machado wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> at the time when binutils/gdb was moving to git, there has been some >> discussion in the mailing list [1] about the possibility of hosting >> vendor branches on sourceware.org's binutils-gdb git repository but, as >> far as I understood, there has been no agreement about this policy. > > One small point in favor of vendor branches is that it ensures we > have the code already in hand - if a project goes on the back burner, > or changes ownership, or an admin leaves, the vendor repo can disappear > overnight. > > On the question of space and activity, are there vendor branches that > are really so much more active than our trunk? I would expect them > be to relatively quiet most of the time, vendor branches typically > having fewer people doing work on them. fwiw, I really like irker's reports on #gdb for the trunk. OTOH, the S/N ratio on #gdb will monotonically drop over time as use of vendor branches on binutils-gdb scales up. There are days when the S/N ratio on #gdb would drop to barely useful with the branches that are there now. If it is really hard to *only* show trunk commits on #gdb, that is, IMO, a strong argument in favor of putting vendor branches in a different repo. *If* one really wanted irker even with it having to report commits in all branches then one *could* have a separate channel, but it's not my first choice (or possibly second choice even). OTOH, #gdb has been relatively quiet for vendor-branch commits recently, maybe this has already been fixed? I'm ok with a binutils-gdb-vendor repo or some such. Seems like it should be trivial for overseers to set up (I'm assuming people won't want a copy of trunk in this repo with a cron job, or some such, to keep it up to date, or any other such time commitment from overseers). Whether a separate vendor repo uses materially more resources, I don't know.