From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <dd6fe68a0810231039t7f4eca97y64a2939bea6c10a4@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:39:59 -0700
From: "Russ Cox" <rsc@swtch.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] plan9port lacks exportfs server
In-Reply-To: <1224739614.11627.124.camel@goose.sun.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <1223158526.466.10.camel@ginkgo>
	 <ee9e417a0810060924p7db19386s8b28dbc1ed2254b2@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1223351034.19902.17.camel@goose.sun.com>
	 <dd6fe68a0810181020n4136964cr17c2f8aa05839573@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1224739614.11627.124.camel@goose.sun.com>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 25e3e2a0-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> Thus, I was thinking that perhaps if you could
> lay the ground rules for how new things could
> be added to your canonical plan9port tree these
> little annoyances could be dealt with.

The ground rules are: you make it work with as
few changes as possible from the Plan 9 original,
and then you send me the changes.

If you are using Mercurial, it is easiest if you
check it into your own tree and then send me
the output of "hg export" as an attachment.

Russ