libbsd development policy clarification needed?

[Gedare Bloom]

On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 8:49 AM Sebastian Huber
<sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>
> On 06.02.23 16:06, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> > Yes, thanks. This looks like a good analysis. I would definitely
> > prefer to get master and 6-freebsd-12 into harmony. Then it is a
> > little simpler to discuss the other problems in libbsd.
> >
> > Vijay had similar kind of success (and problems) as you did with
> > cherry-picking off of 6-freebsd-12. I think he made it a little
> > further. I guess one possible route forward would be to begin working
> > on this effort and share results, pushing to master when some
> > relatively stable milestones are reached.
>
> This branch already contains an update to FreeBSD head 2020-02-09 (about
> 5 months of FreeBSD development):
>
> https://github.com/RTEMS/rtems-libbsd/compare/master...sebhub:rtems-libbsd:master-update
>
> If you start to cherry-pick things to the current master, this effort
> from my side is probably wasted.
>
Would it be viable to still cherry-pick on to your updated master?

The farther these branches get from each other the more effort will be
wasted by everyone. Either we continue to maintain two branches, or we
at some point decide how to continue from this master branch. It would
be good to know if NFSv4 is indeed fully supported for EPICS users
without the changes made by Chris in 6-freebsd-12.

Gedare