From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Oct 24 17:48:35 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F77DE2E;
 Fri, 24 Oct 2014 17:48:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from kib.kiev.ua (kib.kiev.ua [IPv6:2001:470:d5e7:1::1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0128962C;
 Fri, 24 Oct 2014 17:48:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from tom.home (kostik@localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by kib.kiev.ua (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s9OHmT9j023027
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
 Fri, 24 Oct 2014 20:48:29 +0300 (EEST)
 (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.9.2 kib.kiev.ua s9OHmT9j023027
Received: (from kostik@localhost)
 by tom.home (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id s9OHmTUC023026;
 Fri, 24 Oct 2014 20:48:29 +0300 (EEST)
 (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: tom.home: kostik set sender to kostikbel@gmail.com
 using -f
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 20:48:29 +0300
From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
To: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: getting rid of oldnfs
Message-ID: <20141024174829.GC1877@kib.kiev.ua>
References: <691948956.6194558.1414090646089.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca>
 <alpine.BSF.2.11.1410241641370.72164@fledge.watson.org>
 <20141024161735.GB1877@kib.kiev.ua>
 <CAPyFy2CeDxHzKH_1AKg50K3REdGt5=Y90dDs2au4gE5EUnRedw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPyFy2CeDxHzKH_1AKg50K3REdGt5=Y90dDs2au4gE5EUnRedw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00,
 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FREEMAIL_FROM,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no
 autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on tom.home
Cc: Rick Macklem <rmacklem@uoguelph.ca>, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>,
 freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 17:48:35 -0000

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 01:42:20PM -0400, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 24 October 2014 12:17, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I remember the main reason for keeping oldnfs, both server and client,
> > around in HEAD was to facilitate MFC of fixes to the branches which
> > still use oldnfs, i.e. stable/8.  If this reason is still valid, oldnfs
> > have to stay in HEAD till stable/8 is supported or interested for
> > developers.
> >
> > I usually do not like direct commits into the stable branches.
> > Otherwise, I see no reason to keep oldnfs around.
> 
> I only see real value in that if we're actually building and testing
> it on HEAD on a regular basis though. If we don't build it by default
> on HEAD and don't generally test it there, I think we're actually
> worse off to commit changes to HEAD first and then MFC.

We do build both (old) nfsclient and nfsserver, at least as modules.