dev-handbook: update description of contrib software

[mhorne]

Summary

The existing description reflects a time when the process for managing
contrib software was less standardized. Provide a brief description of
how we manage vendor branches, with some conventions.

Open questions:

• Is this the best place to act as source of truth for this information (separate from the import instructions)?
• What information that I have put here is most likely to become stale?

Test Plan

Rendered version: https://people.freebsd.org/~mhorne/books/draft/developers-handbook/policies/1/

[carlavilla]

documentation/content/en/books/developers-handbook/policies/_index.adoc

100

Use the filepath macro

[emaste]

documentation/content/en/books/developers-handbook/policies/_index.adoc

98

Maybe make the link text "libarchive's FREEBSD-upgrade file"?

[emaste]

Is this the best place to act as source of truth for this information (separate from the import instructions)?

I'd like to revisit the developer's handbook and committer's guide. there is legitimately some information that is only applicable to committers with @freebsd.org accounts, but with the git transition there is a lot that's in the committer's guide that is relevant to all contributors. But that is a bigger effort than this specific change, and I don't off hand have an opinion on where this should go vis a vis import instructions.

documentation/content/en/books/developers-handbook/policies/_index.adoc

92

It appears this dates to

commit aacf62b851e073c48c39bbd479a44aa5990ff78c
Author: Nik Clayton <[e-mail]>
Date:   Wed Apr 1 18:25:32 1998 +0000

    This is first step in the Handbook migration from the LinuxDoc DTD to
    the DocBook DTD. Details on how this was carried out are in the README
    file.

The removed statement hasn't really been true for a couple of decades. Thanks for addressing this.

[mhorne]

Tweak link text, use filepath macro.

[mhorne]

In D42302#965214, @emaste wrote:

Is this the best place to act as source of truth for this information (separate from the import instructions)?

I'd like to revisit the developer's handbook and committer's guide. there is legitimately some information that is only applicable to committers with @freebsd.org accounts, but with the git transition there is a lot that's in the committer's guide that is relevant to all contributors. But that is a bigger effort than this specific change, and I don't off hand have an opinion on where this should go vis a vis import instructions.

Sounds good, it should stay here then.

I have a lot of thoughts about the Developer's Handbook, and its somewhat confused purpose in the larger scheme of documentation. I intend to approach the freebsd-doc list about this in the near future. I think this is definitely in line with identifying overlap with the committers guide.

documentation/content/en/books/developers-handbook/policies/_index.adoc

100

Thanks for teaching me about this. FYI it does not appear to render any differently than regular text.

[imp]

No pointer to the vendor import process?
Otherwise I like the changes with one nit.

documentation/content/en/books/developers-handbook/policies/_index.adoc

90

I'd do less or awk instead of patch. Patch doesn't really have an upstream, though openbsd often has good bits to pull in

[mhorne]

In D42302#965311, @imp wrote:

No pointer to the vendor import process?

This is in the section right below, addressed by the other diff.

documentation/content/en/books/developers-handbook/policies/_index.adoc

90

Great suggestion, I will change it to awk before committing.