svn commit: r300961 - vendor/one-true-awk/dist

[Pedro Giffuni]

On 05/29/16 14:06, Cy Schubert wrote:
> In message <201605291817.u4TIHnN7040344 at slippy.cwsent.com>, Cy Schubert
> writes:
>> In message <574B2EAC.3010908 at FreeBSD.org>, Pedro Giffuni writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 29/05/2016 12:37, Cy Schubert wrote:
>>>> In message <201605291618.u4TGItNJ024583 at repo.freebsd.org>, "Pedro F.
>>>> Giffuni" w
>>>> rites:
>>>>> Author: pfg
>>>>> Date: Sun May 29 16:18:55 2016
>>>>> New Revision: 300961
>>>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/300961
>>>>>
>>>>> Log:
>>>>>    one-true-awk: replace 0 with NULL for pointers
>>>>>
>>>>>    Also remove a redundant semicolon.
>>>>>    Submitted upstream already.
>>>>>
>>>>> Modified:
>>>>>    vendor/one-true-awk/dist/b.c
>>>>>    vendor/one-true-awk/dist/lex.c
>>>>>    vendor/one-true-awk/dist/maketab.c
>>>>>    vendor/one-true-awk/dist/parse.c
>>>>>    vendor/one-true-awk/dist/run.c
>>>>>    vendor/one-true-awk/dist/tran.c
>>>>>
>>>> Was this commit and r300962 obtained from the upline or vendor or were
>>>> these commits local to FreeBSD only?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> There is no public awk public repository AFAICT, but bwk acknowledged
>>> the submission.
>>>
>>> The change to openresolv was merged to the public repository.
>>
>> As they've acknowledged the submissions, can you please tag the new
>> versions of awk and openresolve with the correct upstream version numbers,
>> please?
>
> Additionally, if there are no new version numbers, what reason is there for
> polluting the vendor branch with local patches to it? Is not the vendor
> branch for virgin code retrieved (or received) from the vendor (or upline)?
>
>

Heck!

Can't you simply trust the committer knows what he is doing?

http://roy.marples.name/projects/openresolv/info/12cb1c1fb10df107

For nawk there is not public repository but bwk's acknowlegement said:

"Thanks -- that's something that I should have done long long ago."

So I think both changes are pretty much vendor code now.

Pedro.