From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13045 invoked by alias); 15 Jan 2005 02:12:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12734 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2005 02:12:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (205.217.158.180) by sourceware.org with QMTP; 15 Jan 2005 02:12:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 9416 invoked by uid 10); 15 Jan 2005 02:12:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 12638 invoked by uid 500); 15 Jan 2005 02:12:13 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com, mark@codesourcery.com To: mark@codesourcery.com Cc: libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Branches in CVS repository? References: <200501150003.j0F03Wka006774@sirius.codesourcery.com> From: Ian Lance Taylor Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 02:12:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200501150003.j0F03Wka006774@sirius.codesourcery.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg00153.txt.bz2 Mark Mitchell writes: > The GCC project allows anyone with write privileges to create branches > in the CVS repository for aribtrary purposes, provided that the usual > guidelines regarding copyrights are followed. A typical use of these > branches is for distributors to created branches to use for releases, > or for developers to perform experiments. It's an effective way of > making more information available to people without getting in the way > of the mainline development. > > Does the same policy apply to GLIBC and/or Binutils? If not, could it > be considered? > > My particular motivation in this case is the former issue; I would > like to create a branch for a customer release; the branch would > contain backports of patches that apply to this particular customer. > So, if the general policy does not apply, is it permissible for me to > create this particular branch? I don't think that the binutils group has ever developed a plan for branches. I don't think anybody has ever wanted to make a binutils branch other than the ones we make for releases. Personally I think it is perfectly reasonable to follow the gcc approach: anybody with write privileges can create a branch, but all commits to that branch require a copyright assignment just as with all commits to mainline. Nick, Alan, any thoughts on this? Ian