On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 02:29:32PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > [stupid attempt of a flame war deleted]
For the audience which is wondering about what's going on here, I have no idea. The idea behind B-Boot-v2 is: U-Boot itself is a *great* bootloader from the user's poing of view. It is the best thing we have in the open source market place, and it is especially *much* better than all the redboots, grubs whatever. When we started the v2 effort, we saw that U-Boot has a problem with it's inner design. It was great when the U-Boot project started, but it has (successfully) grown over the years, and as with every project that has not been reworked over more than a decade, it is almost impossible to fix design decisions without breaking all the boards out there. Yes, it works with the Linux kernel, but compare the size of the communities. So our intention was and is: 1. Wolfgang has a focus on stability and gradual changes. We respect this political position because it is a *good* one. 2. We need something else four our ARM, PowerPC, Blackfin and x86 projects. The technical features I'm talking about are in the README document. The focus is on a modern design, extensability and testability, not on feature completeness. 3. It was an active decision from our team *not* to fork and call it something else than U-Boot(-v2) when we started. We see that the U-Boot community is strong, it has long term aims and last but not least, it has a *great* bootloader. We talked to Wolfgang before doing so, and Wolfgang's position was in the spirit of "go ahead, here is a git tree, and let the community decide". 4. v2 has been designed with much of the technical ideas of modern Linux kernels in mind; most probably v1 would have done the same if it had started 10 years later. So we think our work fits perfectly into the spirit of the U-Boot project. 4. Yes, community splitup is bad. But if one community has overlapping aims which can be worked on under the same roof - why on earth should we not do this? 5. It may happen that the v1 people take features from v2 and bring them into v1 over the time. Great than - v2 would have done it's job then. 6. It may happen that the v2 community grows over the time and more and more boards will be added. Great then - users would have a choice *within* the U-Boot community, up to a gradual change to the new code base. What ever will happen - I don't see *any* reason for whatever Mike is trying to enforce here. rsc -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
