Re: [coreboot] [URGENT] Full List of AMD-based boards that are going to be removed from coreboot unless people cough up a board status update
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 04/28/2018 03:46 PM, ron minnich wrote:
Hi Ron,
This is a *personal* opinion, not supported by anyone else I suppose, but:
I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that people send in board status 2 times a year.
That's it. It makes it easier for potential users, and for people maintaining the tree.
Sound ok?
Twice a year sounds ok. I still think this should be tied to release cycle, which IMO is not clear at this point. If release cycle would be similar to Linux then I would imagine status update should be sent at - -rcX stage and then after stable release.
We will see how status board update will evolve.
Best Regards, - -- Piotr Król Embedded Systems Consultant https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com
On 02.05.2018 17:53, Piotr Król wrote:
On 04/28/2018 03:46 PM, ron minnich wrote:
This is a *personal* opinion, not supported by anyone else I suppose, but:
I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that people send in board status 2 times a year.
That's it. It makes it easier for potential users, and for people maintaining the tree.
Sound ok?
Twice a year sounds ok. I still think this should be tied to release cycle, which IMO is not clear at this point. If release cycle would be similar to Linux then I would imagine status update should be sent at
- -rcX stage and then after stable release.
Removing boards from the master branch happened right after releases before. coreboot releases are not "stable" btw. more reference points.
Related: coreboot desperately needs a release manager. We had a 6 month release cycle, IIRC. I guess the last has been due in April, but nobody talked about it yet. Neither have we published the release notes of the 4.7 release [1], afaics.
Nico
Release notes for 4.7 are published in the download section of coreboot, alongside the releases [1]. If you mean a blog post, I agree, I didn't do one of those for 4.7.
As far as the panic about boards getting removed, while it would be good to remove UNUSED boards from the current master branch, I don't think enough progress has been made to actually know what boards are not being used. We still haven't even finished removing boards that don't support early CBMEM.
I'll send out an announcement about the 4.8 release later today.
Martin
[1] https://coreboot.org/releases/coreboot-4.7-relnotes.txt
On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:34 AM, Nico Huber nico.h@gmx.de wrote:
On 02.05.2018 17:53, Piotr Król wrote:
On 04/28/2018 03:46 PM, ron minnich wrote:
This is a *personal* opinion, not supported by anyone else I suppose, but:
I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that people send in board status 2 times a year.
That's it. It makes it easier for potential users, and for people maintaining the tree.
Sound ok?
Twice a year sounds ok. I still think this should be tied to release cycle, which IMO is not clear at this point. If release cycle would be similar to Linux then I would imagine status update should be sent at
- -rcX stage and then after stable release.
Removing boards from the master branch happened right after releases before. coreboot releases are not "stable" btw. more reference points.
Related: coreboot desperately needs a release manager. We had a 6 month release cycle, IIRC. I guess the last has been due in April, but nobody talked about it yet. Neither have we published the release notes of the 4.7 release [1], afaics.
Nico
[1] https://pads.ccc.de/s7c2eXetAu
-- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
-
Martin Roth -
Nico Huber -
Piotr Król