On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message <alpine.bsf.2.00.1003050912340.5...@fledge.watson.org>, Robert
Watso n writes:
Doing that kind of rearrangement [...] would be a nightmare for anyone with
large [...] patches, so I'd say we could pretty much rule that out
outright.
I would say that we should do it occasionally, to encourage these FreeBSD
users to contribute as many of their local changes back to the project, as
possible :-)
Absolutely -- and rearranging a tree is a good way to invalidate all those
patches as well :-).
It's a trade-off, obviously, but what it does mean is that we shouldn't
rearrange the tree without thinking about both sides: it's not just the
aesthetics of a particular layout over another, it's that changes in layout
come with a less visible but much larger cost than "svn mv".
Robert
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
