Excuse me if the answer is out in a FAQ somewhere, but what's the policy on upstream patches? We're looking at revitalising the Apple port, and currently are working on a Git clone of some code that goes back to onnv_72. (Git was initially chosen for reasons of expediency and familiarity, as well as the availability of GitHub for open sharing.)
One of the things we're trying to find out is how to merge with upstream changes in the most efficient way. Clearly, we can create our own Hg clone and then drive everything from that, but it would be good to know what the policy is on folding these upstream. We're not at a level of maturity that we're actually looking at fixing ZFS-related bugs that would be widely applicable; but rather, Apple-specific hooks (surrounded by the necessary #ifdefs) which are needed for the Apple port. Ideally, if we can push these upstream then that will help later revisions. (There is a subsequent question, which is where to put the Apple-specific code that wraps ZFS ...) Anyway, if there's any experience from other forks and how they've handled this in the past, I'd be glad to hear of your stories. Alex
