From sabre at nondot.org Mon Feb 19 00:06:14 2007 From: sabre at nondot.org (Chris Lattner) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 00:06:14 -0600 Subject: [llvm-commits] CVS: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html Message-ID: <200702190606.l1J66E9V025756@zion.cs.uiuc.edu> Changes in directory llvm/docs: DeveloperPolicy.html updated: 1.25 -> 1.26 --- Log message: incremental changes to own section, protosection on patents --- Diffs of the changes: (+27 -15) DeveloperPolicy.html | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) Index: llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html diff -u llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html:1.25 llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html:1.26 --- llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html:1.25 Sun Feb 18 23:59:30 2007 +++ llvm/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html Mon Feb 19 00:05:58 2007 @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
This section contains policies that pertain generally to regular LLVM @@ -103,16 +102,13 @@
cvs diff -Ntdup -5- or with the utility utils/mkpatch. to make it easy to read the + or with the utility utils/mkpatch, which makes it easy to read the diff.
Once the design of the new feature is finalized, the work itself should be + done as a series of incremental changes, not as + a long-term development branch.
+ -Once the design of the new feature is finalized, the work itself should be - done as a series of incremental changes, not as a long-term development - branch. Long-term development branches have a number of drawbacks:
+In the LLVM project, we do all significant changes as a series of + incremental patches. We have a strong dislike for huge changes or + long-term development branches. Long-term development branches have a + number of drawbacks:
Contributions must not knowingly infringe on any patents. To the best of + our knowledge, LLVM is free of any existing patent violations and it is our + intent to keep it that way.
+