Attention is currently required from: Lean Sheng Tan, Martin L Roth, Patrick Georgi, Paul Menzel, Subrata Banik.
Werner Zeh has posted comments on this change by Werner Zeh. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/82086?usp=email )
Change subject: Documentation/index.md: Add coreboot's blob policy ......................................................................
Patch Set 3:
(3 comments)
File Documentation/index.md:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/82086/comment/674b14f6_9be79e72?usp... : PS3, Line 154: proprietary UEFI : implementations
Remove UEFI?
I will replace it with "proprietary firmware implementations" to make it clear that the scope is still the firmware layer.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/82086/comment/91857ef0_46571192?usp... : PS3, Line 177: Please see additionally
Remove the trailing space?
Acknowledged
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/82086/comment/03ec3c2c_0c1ab354?usp... : PS3, Line 179:
Where should that discussion take place?
There are various possible ways on how these discussions can take place (mailing list, dedicated calls, face-2-face meetings on conferences, ...). I do not want to name any of them here in particular to not limit the scope in any way. This paragraph is there to make it clear that the community will be taken into account in such cases. And if, for some reason, the community fails to negotiate, ultimately the leadership will decide.
The commit message should elaborate a way forward to replace the blob.
You mean the commit message of a patch that introduces the new blob?
Also, a new blob should be announced on the mailing list?
Well, this could be a preferred way but must not be the only possibility.
-
Werner Zeh (Code Review)