[U-Boot-Users] [RFD] Consistent debugging output structure

[Robert Schwebel]

On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 08:44:21AM +0100, Holger Schurig wrote:
> In Linux, Linus is sometimes making changes to Linux that breaks other 
> drivers. He does so by intent, e.g. by renaming types/variables where the 
> structure changed. He does also accept janitorial patches. If somebody then 
> is angry and says "Change XYZ broke my driver" he simply says "So fix it".
> 
> In U-Boot, I have the perception that things happen differently. You say "new 
> code should do it like this", but without changing the existing code. I guess 
> you go this route so that you don't break code for some boards you don't 
> have. I assume that over time this approach will lead to various ways on how 
> to do things, maybe to old cruft lying around.
> 
> So, basically it's a tradeoff. Have clean code and pain. Or have not-so-clean 
> code, possible with overhead, and less pain.

Ack. U-Boot has reached a size where it is simply impossible for one or
two maintainers to make sure that _all_ ports remain working while
things progress. I want to repeat the suggestion I've made before: make
a list on the web site with something like "board/maintainer/test-date".
Who wants to have a version which is actually working has to start with
the latest tested u-boot version and probably see what is working and
what fails, which has to be ported up. Then speed up the release cycle
so that people at least don't have to rely on CVS versions but on
"unstable" releases.

I don't say that all that quality inspection is wrong, but otherwhise
the code will never been cleaned up. And I suppose we are in an unstable
release cycle!

Robert 
-- 
 Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de
 Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry
   Braunschweiger Str. 79,  31134 Hildesheim, Germany
   Handelsregister:  Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686
    Phone: +49-5121-28619-0 |  Fax: +49-5121-28619-4