[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "vendor branch"
From: |
Ian Lance Taylor |
Subject: |
Re: "vendor branch" |
Date: |
11 Jun 2002 12:28:51 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 |
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
> I asked why an Emacs CVS interface has a command for "vendor branch",
> and Stephan Monnier replied:
>
> It comes from the original motivation for CVS: keep a local repository
> with
> local changes to some externally developed program. You keep the
> vendor's source code on a branch called the vendor branch (normally
> 1.1.1) and you keep your own version on the trunk.
>
> I suspected it was something like that. The problem with this
> terminology is the assumption that the original version of the program
> came to you from a "vendor". That assumption essentially denies the
> existence of organizations such as the FSF, or the CVS developers
> likewise, which develop software but are not vendors.
>
> Ten years ago I convinced the POSIX committee to get rid of certain
> statements which assumed every system has a "vendor". Can we replace
> "vendor" in CVS with some other term that doesn't make that
> assumption? Perhaps "original" version?
Just call it the import branch. Makes more sense anyhow.
Ian