Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> writes: > Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > >> On 15 August 2012 20:25, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: >>> On 15.08.2012, at 21:17, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> >>>> We create a number of default drives for machines to use: floppy, >>>> CD-ROM, SD card. Machines can suppress the ones they don't use, but >>>> few do. Fix that. >> >>>> v2: >>>> Make default drives opt-in instead of opt-out for boards (Andreas) >>>> Cover new target unicore32 >>>> Bonus fix for unicore32 -M puv3 without -kernel >>>> Cover mpc8544ds, pseries (missed in v1) >>> >>> Nack from my POV. Too late for 1.2. Better get this in early for 1.3.
What's the risk? For the record, I tested every single machine to make sure it still gets default drives for any drive it uses. > No, it's not too late for 1.2. > > The release process is pretty clear. Major features needed to be posted > before August 1st. The late to get non-bug fixes in is today. > > This is not a major feature but more importantly, has gone through a few > revisions and has gotten positive review comments. > > So let's not just go around declaring things as being "too late". If > something needs more review or hasn't gotten adequate review, it's > perfectly acceptable to point that out. But please don't just Nack and > say it's too late. > >> Agree. I also think we should follow up Paul Brook's suggestion >> that we don't need to have any kind of "default sd card" flag >> at all. Floppy is weird because we don't properly separate out >> the drive and the controller, right? Not sure about cdrom... > > This is a valid critique and suggests that more review is needed. > Given that, I won't pick this up today. But let's not throw around > Nacks without justification. Paul's idea is worth pursuing. But I don't think we should reject a improvement we can have now just we can imagine an even nicer improvement we may have some day. Taking the former now doesn't make the latter any harder.
