[ppc-dev] Summary: Restructuring Efforts

Michael Meissner meissner at cygnus.com
Sat Feb 20 00:54:44 EST 1999

On Fri, Feb 19, 1999 at 05:12:21PM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Christian Zankel <zankel at tarantel.rz.fh-muenchen.de> wrote:
> > There should be another cvs tree used for developers. A lot of
> > (inofficial) patches are floating around. So, this tree can be used as
> > the common base where developers can start with their patches upon.
> I think a CVS tree for developers is a good idea.  In fact I think we
> need two trees; one for developers to share their latest thoughts, and
> another one where we put stuff once it is tested and known not to
> break things for most users.  The second tree would then be the one
> from which patches get sent to Linus.

Why do people keep mentioning a second tree, and not using something like a
branch off of the main cvs tree?  Within egcs, we use branches for separate
development tasks (1.1.x and mainline).  In fact right now, I have my own
branch for the PowrerPC compiler changes.

Michael Meissner, Cygnus Solutions (Massachusetts office)
4th floor, 955 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA
meissner at cygnus.com,	617-354-5416 (office),	617-354-7161 (fax)

[[ This message was sent via the linuxppc-dev mailing list. Replies are ]]
[[ not forced back to the list, so be sure to  Cc linuxppc-dev  if your ]]
[[ reply is of general interest. To unsubscribe from linuxppc-dev, send ]]
[[ the message 'unsubscribe' to linuxppc-dev-request at lists.linuxppc.org ]]

More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list