Hi everybody, In our leadership meeting[1] we discussed how we should deal with tree-wide changes (ranging from "new file header" to "some API is gone now"). The concern was that right now, anything can change at any time, making local development harder.
There have been a few ideas but nothing definite yet: One idea was to declare some interfaces (e.g. those used by src/mainboards/**), with varying stability horizons (e.g. "only change right after a release"), or backward compatibility guarantees (although the details still seemed hazy on how that could work in practice.) Another idea brought up was to require that such changes come with documentation and, ideally, migration support in the form of scripts and the like. We had something like this in the past[2] and I created a proposal[3] to establish it as a rule and build a culture around documenting sweeping changes. One doesn't exclude the other, and there may be other approaches on how to make development easier without calcifying our codebase. Or maybe people don't see a problem that needs fixing? In any case, I wanted to bring it up in a larger forum to make sure that we find rough consensus across the community before a decision is made on how to proceed here. Regards, Patrick [1] minutes at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NRXqXcLBp5pFkHiJbrLdv3Spqh1Hu086HYkKrgKjeDQ/edit#heading=h.9hutkekd50uf [2] http://web.archive.org/web/20130315025026/http://www.coreboot.org/Flag_Days [3] https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/52576 -- Google Germany GmbH, ABC-Str. 19, 20354 Hamburg Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado
_______________________________________________ coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org
