[U-Boot-Users] TI DaVinci merge, was: uboot custodian question

[Wolfgang Denk]

In message <Pine.LNX.4.64ksi.0708031344040.24286 at home-gw.koi8.net> you wrote:
> 
> Clean up WHAT? Man, I'm on the verge now...

Please calm down and let's discuss this on a technical level.

> The problem is there were _ABSOLUTELY NO_ feedback, just silence. I _WOULD_
> clean up or fix anything but there was _ABSOLUTELY NO_ , repeat _ABSOLUTELY
> NO_ feedback on that submission !!! I've just got "your patches are added to
> the queue" from Peter and that's all.

You are right, ther ehas not been any feedback for a long, long time,
and nothing happened since your submission. That is regrettable,  but
that was in the past. Now is now.

> What feedback?! Who is reviewing those patches? It looks like you guys are

You received a few very useful comments from Dirk Behme on Fri, 03 Aug
2007. He wrote:

| - While they still apply against recent git, would be good to update 
| them to cleanly apply. There is a newer mach-types.h as well.
| 
| - There are some #if 0 and #if 1 throughout the code. I think Peter 
| would like to see this fixed.
| 
| - Do we really need an additional types.h 
| include/asm-arm/arch-tms320dm6446/types.h?
...

[I'll omit the remaining suggestions here because you already replied
why you would not want to follow his suggestions.  Even  though  this
might still be debated, it is not significant here.]

But the three suggestions above *are* feedback to your  patches.  Let
me summarize and repeat:

* Please clean up #if 0 and #if 1 in your patch.
* While doing this, please rebase it against the current  version  of
  U-Boot so your patch applies cleanly.
* Please avoid the new types.h file if it is not really necessary.

> Have I refused to clean up or fix the code? Should one develop a sixth sense
> and anticipate what would you think 6 months from now? How can one submit
> patches against _CURRENT_ version reflecting ever changing party line if
> those patches are sitting dormant for 3+ months? They _WERE_ current as of
> the time of posting. What sense does it make to redo them from today's
> version if they would sit in the queue for another half year and then again
> declared not current enough?

It would make little sense if there was reason to believe they  would
indeed stew in the pot for so long.

I can understand that you ar4e frustrated, but  please  help  us  and
give  us  a  chance  that  the new development process is actually an
improvement. If it is possible to use a simple "git  am"  command  to
add  your  patches  to  the current tree chances are *very* good that
they will get added.  On the other side, if they are  known  to  need
cleanup  and  cause a lot of conflicts with current code your chances
are really small.

> I'm fed up with that nonsense. And I have much better use for my time, my
> prototype boards just came in so I have to grab my soldering iron and scope
> and make them work. I have neither time nor will to fight with windmills any
> more. You won, I accept my defeat.

It seems an awful waste of resources to me  to  throw  in  the  towel
after  you  made  95%  of the way. I suggest you leave this issue for
now, and re-read the last few  messages  of  this  thread  after  the
weekend. Then, please reconsider.


Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
"One thing they don't tell you about doing  experimental  physics  is
that sometimes you must work under adverse conditions... like a state
of sheer terror."                                    - W. K. Hartmann