Now I'm curious...
Koen Kooi
koen at dominion.kabel.utwente.nl
Sun Sep 2 09:32:28 UTC 2007
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Rob Landley schreef:
> The official uClibc tree has seen 35 patches since the 0.9.29 release. That
> tree hasn't been touched in a month. The uClibc-nptl branch (scheduled to
> become 0.9.30) was last touched 5 weeks ago, and before that 4 months ago.
> The last time the uClibc maintainer posted to this list was in May. It is
> now September.
>
> The uClibc project is, for all intents and purposes, on hiatus at the moment.
>
> Meanwhile, Peter S. Mazinger says his uClibc tree has 1194 commits relative to
> 0.9.29. (That's one thousand, one hundred, and ninety-four.) I just had a
> longish conversation with him on #gentoo-embedded on freenode, during which
> he showed me how to patch uClibc/Rules.mak to get armv4l soft-float working.
>
> Peter unsubscribed from this list almost exactly one year ago, due to
> disagreements with Manuel Nova and Steven Hill:
> http://www.uclibc.org/lists/uclibc/2006-March/015014.html
>
> Manuel's objection was that Peter was making too many changes and checking
> them into the development branch, which was making it hard for other
> developers to keep up:
> http://www.uclibc.org/lists/uclibc/2006-March/015018.html
So Manuel wants a trunk/trunk and if that gets too much development for his taste a
trunk/trunk/trunk? So what does 'development branch' really mean in the uclibc world?
>
> Steven's objection was that he was getting paid to do large uClibc changes
> out-of-tree, none of which would be merged until the end of the contract, and
> that changes to the public tree in the meantime made more work for him
> keeping his out-of-tree stuff in sync, and therefore Steven wanted Peter to
> stop interfering with Steven's contract by doing rapid unrelated development:
> http://www.uclibc.org/lists/uclibc/2006-March/015048.html
> http://www.uclibc.org/lists/uclibc/2006-March/015049.html
Sounds like someone needs to read up on svk or git-svn...
> Peter's last post (asking how to unsubscribe) was August 25, 2006. Steven and
> Manuel got what then wanted. Does it seem to anyone else here that a year
> later, the result is that uClibc development has effectively ground to a
> halt?
So if I understand correctly almost everything interesting in NOT in trunk. So as a distro
person I get to pick between a shitload of uclibc 'trees' that might or might not work...
Can't we lock someone in a room with meld, kdiff3, git and copies of the main uclibc forks?
regards,
Koen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFG2oMsMkyGM64RGpERApV/AJ0StJCAiu9gGI8/41rHu1QqE1Nk4wCfZcZK
64eiH7cYKYJDPlp5JGjxPpw=
=tzOr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the uClibc
mailing list