Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 09:46:30 +0100 From: Ulrich =?utf-8?B?U3DDtnJsZWlu?= <uqs@spoerlein.net> To: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Cleaning up the CDDL import mess Message-ID: <20100706084630.GA6191@roadrunner.spoerlein.net> In-Reply-To: <B49C7178-FA47-4BBE-BFEF-CB137C114A94@FreeBSD.org> References: <B49C7178-FA47-4BBE-BFEF-CB137C114A94@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 05.07.2010 at 19:56:19 +0100, Rui Paulo wrote: > Right now we have four locations for CDDL import code: > > 1) vendor-cddl > 2) vendor/opensolaris > 3) vendor-sys/opensolaris > 4) and... HEAD itself. > > 1) vendor-cddl seems to be the first DTrace import and it's probably ready to be svn rm'ed because it creates too much confusion. The first thing someone who is looking at CDDL source is to probably look at vendor-cddl and I would like to avoid this. > But I don't know what will happen to the mergeinfo in head/cddl and head/sys/cddl (I think no harm will be done). > > 2 and 3) These are the correct locations IMHO and I know that jhb did move the code here in the past. > > 4) The ZFS code lives in HEAD, unfortunately. I thought the policy was to have a vendor import for vendor code so that we could merge *from* upstream more easily. I was told that this is being done to some extent in Perforce, but I don't know how acceptable this to the community. > > I need to import some DTrace code into 2 and 3, but I would like to svn rm vendor-cddl, if there are no objections. I don't get why we even have a vendor-sys and vendor-crypto and would like to see all of them moved into one common vendor tree. Just my two cents ... Uli
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100706084630.GA6191>