Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 17:47:18 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org>, Dima Dorfman <dd@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/zic private.h scheck.c zic.c src/us Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0107171745520.65013-100000@besplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.010716133510.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 16 Jul 2001, John Baldwin wrote:
> On 16-Jul-01 David O'Brien wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 09:01:16AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
> >> > zic is vendor code; please back this out.
> >>
> >> Why isn't it in src/contrib then?
> >
> > Many things that today would be in src/contrib were imported into
> > {,gnu}/usr.?bin. GNU grep is another example of this. the `contrib'
> > convention we use today doesn't date back to 2.0.
>
> It's (realtively) small, so why not move it to contrib/ to make this more
> obvious? src/gnu is already somewhat off in its own namespace and is already
> treated as contrib stuff, however, how are committers supposed to know what
> "magical" parts of src/usr.s?bin/ are actually 3rd party?
By reading the cvs history.
Bruce
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0107171745520.65013-100000>