On 09.05.2018 01:04, Nico Huber wrote:
Unless a pointer as described above exists for a given plat- form that relies on a blob, all changes* to that platform *shall* be refused.I think this is counter-productive, as is removing any old boards that don't comply. I am okay with creating new rules for future platforms, but there is no reason to throw perfectly good and working boards out just because they weren't written to comply with something we only just made up. You wouldn't really be punishing anyone with that (vendors don't care about outdated chips anyway), you'd just be taking choice away from our users.
Well, that's why I brought older Intel based CrOS devices up. I think they are the only ones that currently can't comply. I agree that we should have an exception for older platforms. But it's not really something "just made up", IMHO. Google made their own rules when bringing blobs in with Sandy Bridge, just to break them later. So the problem was obviously already visible when these platforms were added.
I need to clarify this. There were no written rules, AFAIR. What I meant was that Google broke with a practice they established themselves. So they should have noticed the conflict, IMHO.
I'll stop yelling about the past. Let's focus on some rules for the future.
Nico