On Thursday, February 13, 2014 7:58:07 AM UTC+1, Jim Blandy wrote: > I think folks are being a little optimistic about the impact of having > > MIPS code in tree. My experience has been that it usually does end up > > being a distraction. > > > > If we truly treat MIPS as a tier-3 platform - for example, if we don't > > hesitate to remove, refactor, or even just fiddle with the types of > > stuff that a grep tells us the MIPS back end uses - then in effect, the > > MIPS port will only work after one of its maintainers has just landed a > > merge. People interested in MIPS will only find those changesets useful. > > > > If that's the case, then it doesn't seem any better than a > > separately-maintained branch --- and that, at least, will be a repo in > > which MIPS users can trust that tip works. > > > > In other words, if the presence of the MIPS code in the tree isn't going > > to affect our tier-1 decisions; and if MIPS users will find the branch > > repo more valuable anyway; then what is the value of having the code in > > tree?
@Jim Blandy I will disagree with the above, since having multiple forks instead of one repo has been proven to be inefficient in multiple opensource projects, as it duplicates a lot of engineering effort for rebasing and important, misses to leverage wisdom of more people working on the same project. It also brings up confusion to the community. We plan to support MIPS backend on the long term, similar what we do for v8 (also became one base after external mips-v8 port reached maturity). We plan to support Firefox OS, so having the code in the same repository makes sense for everyone. Regards, Petar _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
