Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 09:50:05 +0100 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: current@FreeBSD.org Cc: fanf@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Tricky subversion import, what to do? Message-ID: <xeiaiq08xkqq.fsf@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <20101107135329.GL85693@acme.spoerlein.net> ("Ulrich =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sp=F6rlein=22's?= message of "Sun, 7 Nov 2010 14:53:29 %2B0100") References: <20101107135329.GL85693@acme.spoerlein.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 14:53:29 +0100, Ulrich Spörlein <uqs@spoerlein.net> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this is about importing unifdef 2.4, which has no significant code
> changes, but that's not the point. The wiki is of no help for this
> particular case.
>
> We have no exclusive vendor branch for unifdef, instead it has been
> converted to svn under vendor/CSRG/dist/usr.bin/unifdef/ and some
> parts of its history (eg. r1591) are copied from there:
>
> A /head/usr.bin/unifdef/Makefile (from /vendor/CSRG/dist/usr.bin/unifdef/Makefile:1590)
> A /head/usr.bin/unifdef/unifdef.1 (from /vendor/CSRG/dist/usr.bin/unifdef/unifdef.1:1590)
> A /head/usr.bin/unifdef/unifdef.c (from /vendor/CSRG/dist/usr.bin/unifdef/unifdef.c:1590)
>
> So, my first instinct would be to
>
> $ svn mv $FSVN/vendor/CSRG/dist/usr.bin/unifdef $FSVN/vendor/unifdef/dist
> (put all files (or just the necessary subset?) of unifdef-2.4 in vendor/unifdef/dist)
> $ svn ci
> $ svn cp $FSVN/vendor/unifdef/dist $FSVN/vendor/unifdef/2.4
> $ svn cp $FSVN/vendor/unifdef/dist/unifdef.{c,1} $FSVN/head/contrib/unifdef/
> $ svn rm head/usr.bin/unifdef/unifdef.{c,1}
> (but this part loses the actual history on head, as it was never
> committed to the vendor branch)
> (update usr.bin/unidef/Makefile to point to contrib/unifdef)
> $ svn ci
>
> But then again, the first steps could also be:
> $ svn cp head/usr.bin/unifdef vendor/unifdef/dist; svn ci
> $ svn cp vendor/unifdef/dist vendor/unifdef/2.3; svn ci
>
> This seems more reasonable to me, but I'm not sure what the policy is on
> "old stuff" under vendor/
I think it all depends on how "valuable" the merge history from
/vendor/CSRG/dist/usr.bin/unifdef to /vendor/unifdef/dist is. IMO it
isn't, because we won't be merging from the CSRG code anymore.
So I'd prefer the second option.
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xeiaiq08xkqq.fsf>