"Brian Szymanski" <bks10cornell.edu> writes:

> Hiya,
>
> I've been looking around the source tree for things to do, and I've
> stumbled across a few unused files. The last time I submitted a
> change-request for this (removing win32 specific files in the kerbIV
> source), it was not received for the reason that 3rd party software is not
> mucked with in such a way. Fair enough. But what exactly is the definition
> of 3rd party software in the source tree? For example, patch was
> originally written by Larry Wall, but it's been in the tree since the
> NetBSD fork, has been modified in non-trivial ways a bunch of times over
> its lifetime in the OpenBSD tree, and hasn't been reimported from Mr.
> Wall's tree (if he still has one), except for the LICENSE change he
> granted a few months back... So is patch considered to be "third party"
> software? More generally, is there an easy way for me to discern what's
> considered "third party" software in the source tree and what's not?

3rd party software is the software where your modifications are rejected
because the maintainer doesn't want to have problems in future updates.

//art

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]