On 10/07/2015 21:31, John Crispin wrote:
>
>
> On 10/07/2015 17:19, Karl Palsson wrote:
>> John Crispin <blo...@openwrt.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 10/07/2015 13:27, Karl Palsson wrote:
>>>> Isn't this normally called the "OYE-0001" ? not "OY-0001" ? The website
>>>> and all literature I've seen uses the "OYE-0001" name...
>>>>
>>>> Regardless, in many places, you have not followed the existing
>>>> alphabetical order.
>>>>
>>> there never has been an alphabetic order requirement and many entries
>>> are not alphabetically sorted
>>
>> Lots of requirements have never been written down I'm sure. Most of the
>> files are generally well sorted. Would you rather they were not sorted?
>> Is it _bad_ of me to provide cursory review comments that try and steer
>> towards maintaining clean, ordered lists? Am I making your job more
>> difficult in any way?
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Karl P
>>
>>
>
> ok agreed, with ar71xx we already have alphabetic order. maybe we should
> just bite the bullet, sort the ramips scripts and thus also enforcing
> the ordering on this target
i just had a closer look and that would be a really huge and messy
patch. additionally we have bits like this
b2c | \
nw718 | \
psr-680w | \
sl-r7205 | \
w502u | \
wr6202)
ucidef_set_interfaces_lan_wan "eth0.1" "eth0.2"
;;
which started with 1 case and had many added over time thus breaking the
ordering. not sure if this is worth the effort. once i find time to
finish the board detect code all this info will be inside json files
anyway, which i hope will around the end of the year.
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
