Dear Masahiro, In message <20140428185854.b2b8.aa925...@jp.panasonic.com> you wrote: > > Before I send Kconfig series v2, > please let me cofirm our approach of maintainers info.
Thanks for all your patience when dealing with all these apparently simple things that nevertheless take so much time and nerves to decide. > Instead, MAINTAINERS file as in Linux Kernel was proposed. > (And the patch series by Daniel is already on Patchwork.) > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/340546/ > But Wolfgang (and Albert) disagreed with it. > > In Kconfig v1 series, I put maintainers info and board status > in board/*/*/Kconfig as non-user-editable settings: > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/342089/ I find myself in the difficult situation that I'm not really happy with either of these approaches, but then I don't have any better solution to suggest. I think I find the board/*/*/Kconfig a bit better. > But I am not sure if this is a good idea. > (At least, it is dirty.) Could you please explain why you think so? > In v2, I will drop maintainers info and board status from Kconfig > and leave them to Daniel's patch. Hm... :-( I hope others will provide more feedback - I'd be seriously unhappy if this decision was based only on gut feelings like mine... Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offense. - E. W. Dijkstra _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
