Date: Sun, 29 May 2016 14:08:59 -0500 From: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org> To: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@komquats.com> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-vendor@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r300961 - vendor/one-true-awk/dist Message-ID: <574B3E4B.2020501@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201605291817.u4TIHnN7040344@slippy.cwsent.com> References: <201605291817.u4TIHnN7040344@slippy.cwsent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 29/05/2016 13:17, Cy Schubert wrote: > In message <574B2EAC.3010908@FreeBSD.org>, Pedro Giffuni writes: >> >> >> On 29/05/2016 12:37, Cy Schubert wrote: >>> In message <201605291618.u4TGItNJ024583@repo.freebsd.org>, "Pedro F. >>> Giffuni" w >>> rites: >>>> Author: pfg >>>> Date: Sun May 29 16:18:55 2016 >>>> New Revision: 300961 >>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/300961 >>>> >>>> Log: >>>> one-true-awk: replace 0 with NULL for pointers >>>> >>>> Also remove a redundant semicolon. >>>> Submitted upstream already. >>>> >>>> Modified: >>>> vendor/one-true-awk/dist/b.c >>>> vendor/one-true-awk/dist/lex.c >>>> vendor/one-true-awk/dist/maketab.c >>>> vendor/one-true-awk/dist/parse.c >>>> vendor/one-true-awk/dist/run.c >>>> vendor/one-true-awk/dist/tran.c >>>> >>> Was this commit and r300962 obtained from the upline or vendor or were >>> these commits local to FreeBSD only? >>> >>> >> There is no public awk public repository AFAICT, but bwk acknowledged >> the submission. >> >> The change to openresolv was merged to the public repository. > As they've acknowledged the submissions, can you please tag the new > versions of awk and openresolve with the correct upstream version numbers, > please? > That's an impossible request as there are no "correct upstream version numbers". In the case of openresolv, I included the repository revision, but checksums have no chronological sense and should be avoided for tags. In this case using tags for anything other than official releases would be a mess. As stated in our subversion primer (5.4.4): "Vendor patches should be committed to the vendor branch, and merged from there to head. If the patch addresses an issue in a new release that is currently being imported, it /must not/ be committed along with the new release: the release must be imported and tagged first, then the patch can be applied and committed. There is no need to re-tag the vendor sources after committing the patch." Pedro.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?574B3E4B.2020501>