On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [PATCH] Config.mk: update OVMF changeset"):
> > On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > Yes. Those (that?) and the reasons why we aren't just trivially taking
> > > them
> > > are explained in the referenced thread.
>
> That explanation isn't very convincing to me.
>
> > I cannot believe we are going to move forward without a way to introduce
> > any OVMF fixes into the stable branches.
>
> It is fine to introduce OVMF fixes into stable branches, of course.
>
> But it is not fine to introduce other upstream changes to OVMF,
> willy-nilly.
>
> Obviously these two requirements cannot be satisfied without there
> being some branch of OVMF which contains the intended fixes, without
> the unwanted upstream development.
>
> If OVMF upstream do not have such a branch, we need to create one.
That's fine. We need the new branch in osstest and somebody maintaining
it.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
