[U-Boot] [ANNOUNCE] Kconfig support

[Jerry Van Baren]

Robert Schwebel wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:42:08AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> U-Boot-v2 is used here to do real work in our projects. If it isn't
>>> what you need, it is perfectly fine if you ignore it.
>> my concern isnt really narrow to the Blackfin port. i was using it as
>> a practical example. we've talked about v2 in the past as the answer
>> to many of our problems and so we dont bother doing it in v1. but that
>> approach looks to be wrong as v2 is of little practical importance.
>> instead we should be doing what Jean-Christophe is doing: poaching
>> good ideas until we get to the point where v2 can simply die.
> 
> If you mean "you" while saying "we", then yes, it may be correct that
> this is your plan. "We" don't have any plans to let v2 die.
> 
> Should we be mindful of the future? But not at the expense of the
> moment. Be mindful of the living Force, my young Padawan.
> 
> rsc

To quote Yogi Berra, "When you come to a fork in the road... take it."[1]

Maybe V1 lives on.  Maybe V1 runs out of gas, gets overwhelmed by 
legacy, and V2 becomes the continuing u-boot (think linux's ppc -> 
powerpc).  Maybe the two will meet up again at the far side of the circle.

Regardless, you have a choice.  You can and should pick the branch that 
best solves your problem.  Viva la OSS!

Best regards,
gvb

[1] Legend has it, Yogi was giving directions to his house which was on 
a circular road, so it really *didn't* matter which fork you took.