Rules of engagement for the waf replay work

[Mark Atwood]

Rules of engagement for the waf replay:

Do not edit the source, no matter how hairy or nasty it may be.  Not even
the smallest change.

Do not change the source code directory layout

Do not try to make the waf you write "smart" or "elegant".  Use brute force.
Do not spend any effort making it similar to the waf in the current tip.
Just make it work, as stupid and as brute force as possible, no surprises,
no cleverness.  We will then push push it forward, continuing to make it
work and be as stupid as possible, checkin by checkin, until it catches up
to the point in time where waf started working consiistently.

,,m

On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 6:24 AM Amar Takhar <verm at darkbeer.org> wrote:

> Before I start pushing some of the major changes to make the 'replay'
> branch
> happen I need a few questions answered:
>
>  - Is it easier to edit the source for renamed defines to match current or
>    should I add compat shims.
>  - Will the source layout change almost immediately to match current or
> should
>    the current files be used.
>    * I think this should be a mix some are easy to move around others are
> not.
>  - Some directories such as tools/utils can be backported wholesale is
> there any
>    reason why this isn't desirable?
>
>
> Amar.
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at ntpsec.org
> http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ntpsec.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20160503/2e3162ff/attachment.html>