* Uwe Hermann uwe@hermann-uwe.de [070703 01:32]:
I don't have a strong opinion either way (as long as we don't have _forks_ of code for v1 and v2, which is why we now use svn:externals).
I like the way doing the forks as they really allow us to progress with new code while leaving old code intact. We can still make branches of the tree to simulate the old behavior, which is what we are going to do, after all.
and i'm not sure, but i think that in some cases, the likes of uniflash can be used to flash a linuxbios too.
Definately, not everyone needs flashrom.
util in a seperate repo/directory is a bit hypothetic. It does not really gain us anything. Everyone does need lar, but should we pack lar and flashrom in the same repo because it sits in util?
Why would someone want lar when he attempts to download flashrom?
Why would someone not download flashrom? To save how many seconds?
I personally don't think there should be a place in the v3 tree for a utility like this, as it leads an almost completely independent life.
Yes, and it should. The copy in v2/v3 is merely there for convenience.
There is no copy in v3?