This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: git is live
- From: Richard Earnshaw <rearnsha at arm dot com>
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- Cc: Peter Bergner <bergner at vnet dot ibm dot com>, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, GDB Development <gdb at sourceware dot org>, Binutils Development <binutils at sourceware dot org>, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom at linux dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 10:58:25 +0000
- Subject: Re: git is live
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <877gd5iyaz dot fsf at fleche dot redhat dot com> <1382709091 dot 5918 dot 9 dot camel at otta> <CAKOQZ8xh2L_D-gdX2wG7TT0c-r6q4=QXqqFHiUq2WPO-3b3t-Q at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 25/10/13 14:55, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Peter Bergner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 01:01 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
>>> The URLs:
>> Ok, it's probably getting old, but I'll add my thanks
>> for switching us over. Now to my question...
>> >From a policy standpoint, are we going to allow vendor branches
>> in the git repo like glibc does? I'm hoping the answer is yes. :)
>> We didn't allow it before due to it seems CVS issues, but with git,
>> it should now be easy.
> GCC has always allowed vendor branches. I don't see any reason that
> binutils/gdb should prohibit them. Obviously all the code has to be
> under the GPL or some other explicitly permitted license.
I believe the GCC policy is that the code must also be assigned to the
FSF, just as it would be for trunk.