Am So., 11. Nov. 2018 um 14:54 Uhr schrieb echelon@free.fr:
We (the owners of agesa based boards) need to prepare for this eventuality, and maybe if we want to keep coreboot alive (and evolving) on our platforms we should consider a fork... Please don't insult me for this for this reasoning (it is not even a proposal..), but we must face the reality..
You're free to contribute to improve the code quality of AGESA based boards in coreboot. Practically all Lenovo mainboards in the coreboot tree are maintained by volunteers, back to the i945 based x/t60.
to get advice and support in our maintaining efforts..
I don't think advice and support are the issue here, but the question who would be doing the maintaining.
The interesting part about "clean up AGESA" is that you don't need to be an expert in firmware to do that: There are so many simple things to do (for example, align the coding style to be more coreboot-like, given that AMD gave up on the coreboot-AGESA integration). We have a couple of contributors who probably aren't experts in firmware but do great work like that (although not on AGESA, they seem to be interested in other parts of the tree), and slowly ramp up to more complex projects.
Regular board-status updates would also demonstrate that the code is still being actively used in current trees, and help identify commits that broke coreboot on these boards. I wouldn't know if any random supermicro mainboard still boots with coreboot from today's master branch. Do you?
But what definitely won't work, neither in coreboot nor in any fork, is to expect others to cater to your needs: For maintaining, you need maintainers.
Patrick