On 8 November 2010 20:30, Chung-Lin Tang cltang@codesourcery.com wrote:
Still, I would like to see a 'linaro-trunk' branch under svn:// gcc.gnu.org/svn/branches. It would actually serve a different purpose than a LP branch; the LP GCC 4.6 would probably eventually turn into Linaro 4.6, while a SVN branch would be a preparation for re-merging into mainline trunk when 4.7-stage1 opens. Also, for the GCC community, a SVN branch would probably be more convenient.
We can have our patches submitted to gcc-patches, and have it reviewed under the usual [patch, <branch>] format, rather than the odd condition where we ask for approval, then accumulate in an outside repository.
On 8 November 2010 20:17, Richard Sandiford richard.sandiford@linaro.orgwrote:
I agree. One option that Andrew suggested at the meeting was to put the branch in GCC SVN instead of Launchpad. That sounded like a good idea to me. It's usual (maybe even expected) that people who maintain their own SVN branches post the patches they're committing to gcc-patches, so I don't think we could be accused of spamming the list or asking for anything inappropriate.
I just have a feeling that having an SVN branch would go more smoothly than posting patches to the list but maintaining them elsewhere.
I also think that an SVN branch is a better idea than Launchpad, and I agree with both Chung-Lin's and Richard's arguments.
Ira