Re: Clean up bind commit to master, revert to vendor

["Simon 'corecode' Schubert" <corecode@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Aggelos Economopoulos wrote:
> Simon 'corecode' Schubert wrote:
> > [X-Post to kernel@ for discussion]
> >
> > Jan Lentfer wrote:
> > > there was some discussion on irc about where README.DRAGONFLY and
> > > README.DELETED had to go.
> > >
> > > I have left it the way I did it of vendor/LESS and as it was sugested
> > > on irc (README.DRAGONFLY on master, README.DELETED on vendor).
> > >
> > > But generally this should be clarified and the consensus should make
> > > it's way into development(7).
> > Yes, we should decide.  But both should be on the same branch, for
> > coherency.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > Reasons for master:
> > - those files don't belong to the tar ball
>
> I think conceptually README.DELETED should be on the vendor branch --
> after all we don't commit the tarball as is. We delete files first and
> README.DELETED lists those deletions.
>
> > Reasons for vendor branch:
> > - the READMEs describe the files (and what was removed) of the tar ball
>
> - Having README.DELETED on the vendor branch should make for a better
> workflow:
>
> http://gitweb.dragonflybsd.org/dragonfly.git/commitdiff/e449f42a7c170b52bb09c6300ba5b6bfdc5a9a01
>
> (Peter, any further input on this?)
>
> > I don't mind either, just coherency.  I propose to decide on what goes
> > where first, and after that do the import.  Or at least pack both files
> > into the same branch.
>
> Yah, it's no big deal but we should reach a conclusion and document the
> procedure in development(7) ASAP, holding back Jan's changes because of
> this is probably a bit frustrating for him.
>
> FWIW, for the reasons above, I'd prefer keeping the READMEs on the
> vendor branch.

Alright, sounds good to me!

cheers
  simon