Hi again all,
I took part in (half of) a leadership meeting last night, and I was impressed by two things that I didn't expect:
1. Few people seem to take the might of Git into account. We have a tool that can significantly increase the efficiency of development and can help to preempt bugs. But many people would accept a process that breaks Git benefits. Especially with the growth of the coreboot community, I believe this gains importance.
2. The general acceptance of unreviewed code. Yes, one can try to argue that copy-pasted code was already reviewed. But in a different con- text and in a different time. Such argumentation also seems to assume that reviews are mostly about coding style and bikeshedding.
On a few occasions, I've already commented about these things on Gerrit. I'll now try to take the time to detail my concerns with above points in separate emails.
I really hope that discussing this will achieve something. I believe there are some $100k to save for the active coreboot community (albeit partial virtual $, as much of the work is done by volunteers).
Am 06.11.19 um 19:35 schrieb Patrick Georgi:
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 12:39:59PM +0100, Nico Huber wrote:
Some of the mega patches are copies of a predecessor chip (with the minimum amount of changes to integrate it in the build), that are then modified to fit the new chip.
Ack. I think that is a problem. If this procedure is intended, I think we should update our guidelines to reflect that.
I guess first we should get on the same page with regard to strategy. There's a bit of flip-flopping between extremes (code duplication vs. silently breaking stuff).
I don't think this is about code duplication, at least to me that's a separate concern.
Nico