From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eugeniu Rosca Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 16:24:54 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PULL] u-boot-usb/master In-Reply-To: <336fad3a-3157-35f7-d291-b49419833ea4@denx.de> References: <336fad3a-3157-35f7-d291-b49419833ea4@denx.de> Message-ID: <20190615142440.GA30299@x230> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Marek, On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 02:35:12PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 6/15/19 11:46 AM, Eugeniu Rosca wrote: > > Hello Marek, Lukasz cc: Sam > > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 5:23 AM Marek Vasut wrote: > > [..] > >> Sam Protsenko (3): > >> fastboot: Fix slot names reported by getvar > > > > Commit [1] from this PR got replaced by series [2]. > > Replaced where ? [1] seems like a fix to me, [2] seems like feature > addition , Your instincts are correct (i.e. features must be rejected at this late stage) and they deserve credits. However and what seems extremely interesting is: - it is very easy to masquerade a fix as a feature (and viceversa), just by slightly adjusting the title [1-2] and it's very easy to play with your perception this way - it seems like there isn't a process (and this is a OSS-wide issue) of marking a patch as fix/feature (the latter would help the maintainer enormously) - it also appears that sometimes there is a fine line in our minds between what's a fix and what's a feature So, in a nutshell, series [2] is the v2 of commit [1]. IMHO there is no feature added. The two commits from series [2] are: - https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1116099/ - https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1116101/ What's interesting is that, depending on which version of fastboot utility users use/assume, they might see a "regression" introduced by [1-2]. Both [1-2] do changes to align U-Boot with latest fastboot utility from AOSP. What [2] is doing _in addition_ to [1] is: - remove some dead code in U-Boot which will never be exercised assuming users run the latest fastboot - place a bold warning in commit description that users are assumed to be using the latest fastboot utility > so merging [1] this late in the release cycle seems like the > right thing to do. My assumption is that Sam would like to see [1] being dropped in favor of [2], as commented in https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1114850/#2194140 > > > > [1] https://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot/u-boot-usb.git;a=commit;h=97a0c6ff577d57f162abc696c4efc962981229b1 > > [2] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1116097/ ("fastboot: Support > > new A/B slot format") > > -- Best regards, Eugeniu