On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:58:24AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/07/2014 02:45 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > Hey, > > > > given that we now have most of the u-boot socfpga stuff in mainline, I > > decided > > it would be a good idea to list what we're still missing and we should also > > decide how to move on now. > > > > First thing I should probably clarify is the late acceptance of the socfpga > > patches. This is certainly not something we do regularly and is one of the > > worst possible practices to do, but this time it felt rather important to > > get > > the platform in shape, so this exception happened. Furthermore, all of the > > code > > in u-boot-socfpga should be based on u-boot-arm and should be submitted > > through > > the u-boot-arm repository, not directly to u-boot . > > Platform was in this shape for a while that's why I can't see the > reason why this happen. > > Tom: Does it mean that every platform which is not in good shape can > go directly to the mainline in any time? It is definitely something > which is good to know.
So, it's a long standing thing where for non-core changes, deferring to the relevant custodian about what's going to come in close to the release is what's done. So yes, I grilled Marek about what non-socfpga things would be impacted by the changes (RPi) and if he'd tested things there. It all had been through a few post/review cycles. There's an argument to be made that we shouldn't have let socfpga in, back in 2012 or should have pushed harder, sooner, to get more progress made on "real" platform support. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
