Stefan Tauner has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/21886 )
Change subject: squash! Convert flashrom to git ......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
(1 comment)
(1 comment)
I'll take it as is, do we also want it on staging? As it wouldn't affect patch compatibility, I don't care.
Doesn't make that much sense IMHO. I just did not know how to publish it better than this.
I'd welcome it if I could have some say on the order of stable commits so that we can share the commits between 0.9.9.1 and the next release. Your proposed order puts some of the fixes rather late.
https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/21886/1//COMMIT_MSG Commit Message:
https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/21886/1//COMMIT_MSG@11 PS1, Line 11: Convert flashrom to git
and I thought I did already... :) No, subject of sane length can really cover all the topics specifically IMHO.
Yep, it's hard when you don't focus your commits on specific changes.
You say that as if it would be something negative. And that's were we won't agree. If the git transition would have been spread out into commits targeting "specific changes" instead of one concise and presumably accurate enough subject for most purposes one would have to read about one to two dozens.
The change converts (various aspects of) the build system in form of the makefile and getrevision script (to exploit various aspects of git)... which
is
basically what I would expect when a commit of a software
projects
that is known to be using svn contains a subject "Convert
flashrom
to git", don't you?
Would something like this suit you better? Migrate build system to git and add client-side hooks
No, the hooks I'd expect anyway, I was rather nagging about the unrelated changes instead. Though, I don't remember accurately what the commit does now and what not.
Pretty much everything my hijacking PS2 on the stable branch's git patch suggested minus the bugs we fixed in the refinements due to your reviews and the s/-U/-u/.
I'm also not sure if we still argue about the -U? I've just realized that it's not a parent of this commit.
Just because empty commits are a nuisance when working in git. I'd still rather see it in than not but in the end it is merely the shortcut of an unused code path in a build time tool, so... if you insist on your -2 then we will do it later if need be.
Please tell me so that I can rebase + squash for stable.
-
Stefan Tauner (Code Review)