On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 03:54:41PM +0100, Patrick Georgi wrote:
The debate about e7501 (dropping or risking broken code in the tree) reminded me of an idea I had a while ago:
Do we want to establish a list of boards and their latest successfully tested revision, and all maintainers/testers for each board that agree to test changes regularily or on demand (and have the hardware around, of course)?
That way, we'd know who to ask if we make sweeping changes that affect the entire tree.
In theory nice to have, but experience has shown that this list will be ignored and outdated very very soon:
http://www.coreboot.org/Confirmed_working_svn_revisions
I personally also don't think such a list is _that_ important to have. In theory _every_ revision should work and as soon as someone finds a bug / nonworking revision we quickly bisect and make trunk working again, so not much point in such a list IMHO.
The other list I'd like to start is a document (on the wiki) that explains tree wide changes with the revision in which they happened, what happened, and how to replay those changes on a locally modified tree - esp. those with new boards.
Yep, this idea I like very much!
This would help people keeping their local development up to date, and it helps with finding the cause of problems.
Basically, everything that affects the whole tree should be documented with:
- Rev in which this change appeared
Yes.
- Short explanation what happened (maybe just the URL to the mailing
list archive)
Yes.
- Explanation what to change to keep up (incl. scripts, if used)
This one is the most important. It should be a "migration guide"-like HOWTO a la "change variable name FOO to BAR", "remove all BAZ occurences in your code" etc. etc.
- Developer responsible for it
Not sure if this makes sense. And/or it's visible from the Signed-off-by anyway in most cases.
Uwe.