Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:34:58 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: obrien@FreeBSD.org Cc: Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/crypto/openssh canohost.c ssh.h sshd.c Message-ID: <200006270434.WAA01763@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <20000626142054.A2392@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <20000626005246.A11096@dragon.nuxi.com> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006261701000.78867-100000@green.dyndns.org> <20000626142054.A2392@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > You're most likely right about that. Pardon my ignorance, but what is the > > actual harm done by taking another file off the vendor branch, this one > > being only a couple hundred lines? I thought that it was only because the > > file would be duplicated in the repository. > > Grrrr. Do you not read your committers mail?? Have you missed all the > many treaties on this in the past 3 months? It has been explained *MANY* > times in 2000 alone. Please go see the archives search for "vendor > branch". > > The fact you don't understand also tells me you are not ready to commit > to src/contrib (aka src/crypto/ in this case) w/o a review. Actuallyk, I think Brian has done the right thing here. He's brought it off the vendor branch since it's not yet ready to be part of the 'vendor release', and needs more wide testing. Once it has been tested, it can be submitted to the vendor, and the next import it will be part of the vendor's code, and it'll be trivially to fix the 'conflict' and all will be well. This is how vendor branches were originally intended, at least in my reading of all the CVS materials (many of which are unfortunately no longer part of the CVS distribution). Nate 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?200006270434.WAA01763>