David Brownell wrote: > On Tuesday 12 May 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > >> I don't know when the cats can be herded into a 0.2 release >> at this point, but I'm pretty sure it's a month away at least. >> > > Hmm, if you don't know ... then who could? > > The process *does* seem, for now, as if it's largely > "commit patches to SVN" without any publicly defined > goals/targets or visible criteria. > > Zack's "list" seemed useful in terms of having some > kind of direction be defined. But that's distinct > from defining release criteria, or merge criteria. > The old list, or the new rebuild everything into loadable modules stuff? > Right *now*, what criteria are being used to choose > whether to merge a patch, reject it, or hold it back > until the next release? > > > Example: there was a patch a while back (from Dick > Hollenbeck) that included about 60K of ft2232 and > TMS sequencing updates ... and gratuitous changes > to whitespace, and surely other things. I don't > know of many projects which wouldn't also reject > such patches with "please split into smaller patches > so this can be reviewed", as happened. > > Well, since it is more than five days old I suppose it is dead fish. But I can tell you that all the state transition stuff works well, both in 7 state version and and shortest path. There are some issues about PAUSE -> SCAN paths does not go through CAPTURE, but this path is never used in the present code. I do not know about high speed ft2232h and ft4232h since I havnt got any such hardware. Reconnect looks ok but not tested.
Best regards, Magnus _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
