[U-Boot] U-Boot panasonic repo

[Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>]

Hi guys,

On 09/18/2014 10:02 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On Thursday, September 18, 2014 at 09:58:47 AM, Michal Simek wrote:
>> On 09/18/2014 09:27 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 11, 2014 at 07:18:00 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>>>> Hi Michal,
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 06:56:04 +0200
>>>>
>>>> Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 09/11/2014 05:09 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 01:33:20 +0200
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd be interested in maintaining u-boot-socfpga repository. So far,
>>>>>>> we don't have a repo for this platform and there is a large flurry
>>>>>>> of patches flying around without any kind of central point for them.
>>>>>>> I'd like to get your formal consent for starting this and if you
>>>>>>> agree, I'd start sending PR to Albert once the repo is in place.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Me too.  I'd like to own u-boot-uniphier to collect
>>>>>> Panasonic-SoC-specific changes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That would be faster and would not disturb Albert.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure if you need to have separate repo to work like this.
>>>>> I am keeping zynq patches in my microblaze repo and sending pull
>>>>> request to Albert (or Tom now) and there is no problem with that.
>>>>
>>>> The point is that you collect Zynq-specific patches in your own place by
>>>> yourself and then send a pull-req to Albert or Tom, right?
>>>>
>>>> It does not matter whether it is a separate u-boot-zynq repo or
>>>> u-boot-microbraze/zynq branch.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have sent the first series to add the core support of Panasonic SoCs
>>>> and boards (but it is taking much longer than I have expected)
>>>> and then I am planning to send more features and boards in the next
>>>> phase.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What's the difference between what I want to do for Panasonic SoCs
>>>> and what you usually do for Zynq SoCs?
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I fully support that we should have a repo for the panasonic socs, it's
>>> pointless to load Albert by making him apply patches by hand and you have
>>> proven numerous times that you do know what you're doing. I really see no
>>> blocker for doing this.
>>
>> +1 on this if Masahiro wants to have separate repo.
> 
> There is no repo for those SoCs at all, so I'd be all for it.

This is the flow which is IMHO the best.

Masahiro will send the RFC patch for MAINTAINERS file to Albert
with adding his fragment for Panasonic SoCs. If Albert ACK but not apply it
that it means that he agrees with that person to be responsible for this part.
Based on that Masahiro asks for repo (if he wants it) and repo will be created.

Then he sends update patch to mailing list and after review he will apply this
patch to his repo and start to collect SoC specific patches and then send pull
request to Albert.
Also record on wiki will be updated based on that.

This seems to me like a sensible way how to do it which is transparent for everybody.

The same for Masahiro regarding Kconfig if Tom agrees with it.

Thanks,
Michal

-- 
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng), OpenPGP -> KeyID: FE3D1F91
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Microblaze cpu - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Maintainer of Linux kernel - Xilinx Zynq ARM architecture
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian and responsible for u-boot arm zynq platform


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20140918/3d706365/attachment.pgp>