Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 22 Oct 2000 20:33:38 -0700
From:      "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no>
Cc:        Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/etc usbd.conf
Message-ID:  <20001022203338.F6253@dragon.nuxi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20001019101709.A88616@warning.follo.net>; from eivind@yes.no on Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 10:17:09AM %2B0200
References:  <xzpog0jt78y.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1001017224655.53673B-100000@fledge.watson.org> <20001018092813.B60230@warning.follo.net> <20001018144155.C71470@dragon.nuxi.com> <20001019101709.A88616@warning.follo.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 10:17:09AM +0200, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 02:41:56PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 09:28:13AM +0200, Eivind Eklund wrote:
> > > I've got a nasty hack that eases the problem (on a laptop that hasn't got
> > ...
> > > Might be something to put on the vendor branch while we are waiting,
> > 
> > I'm not willing to do so.
> > It has not come from the vendor -- it hasn't even been submitted to the
> > vendor has it?
> 
> No - because I came up with it less than a week ago, and have been trying to
> find a fix that I feel really solve the problem and is appropriate as an
> 'official fix'.

I don't care to put hacks that aren't ready to submit to the vendor into
src/contrib branches.  Keep them local until ready for prime time.

> However, it was mentioned elsewhere in the thread that ISC (in the form
> of Ted Lemon) was already fixing the problem theselves, which would
> make any work I do to most likely be a waste of time.

Not necessarily.  Last time I looked version 3 has license issues.  It is
worth a try to get this fixed in the 2.x series.


> The point of checking in the temporary fix along the vendor branch is to
> have the next version of the vendor's official sources obliterate the change. 

It is also a really hoaky way to use the vendor branch.  Rather one
should only put such temporary fixes on the vendor branch when the vendor
has agreed to accept the patch and the next vendor branch will have the
fix in some form included.

> Thus, by putting it on the vendor branch we get exactly the behavior we
> want.

I've also accepted hacks for ISC dhclient that were not well thought out
by the submitted, and myself not realizing the full subtleties caused
others problems.  Thus I personally will not accept any such changes w/o
being passed by Ted Lemon first.

-- 
-- David  (obrien@FreeBSD.org)


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?20001022203338.F6253>