Personally I don't see any reason for branching, if 99% of the rest of coreboot code (payloads etc.) is compatible. This will only get us outdated for these components on this branch, which otherwise could (and should) be kept simultaneously up-to-date to get the latest goodies. So, just make two folders: 1 - resource allocator v3, 2 - resource allocator v4, and access either v3 or v4 from outside depending on your board selection.
пн, 29 нояб. 2021 г. в 18:53, Nico Huber nico.h@gmx.de:
On 29.11.21 15:58, awokd wrote:
Nico Huber:
On 29.11.21 14:49, awokd wrote:
Branching
I know some people are easily offended by the thought, but I want to mention it anyway as it seems to me like a cheap solution for the com- munity as a whole. We could maintain platforms on separate branches.
Is this different than the status quo?
Yes, these ports wouldn't hold the master branch back anymore.
Meant the status quo approach of deprecating boards and leaving to an older branch. I think you are saying it would be a named branch instead.
Well, if I wanted to maintain a branch I would make it dedicated to these specific ports. That would probably be easier to maintain than a release branch that covers all ports of the given time. Also, it seems to me that leaving things on an anonymous release branch provides too much hope that somebody else will do the work ;)
Nico _______________________________________________ coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-leave@coreboot.org