[U-Boot] [PATCH] OMAP3: Define 64bit vsprintf for NAND

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 20:37 Sun 12 Jul     , Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD,
> 
> In message <20090712152355.GH7218 at game.jcrosoft.org> you wrote:
> >
> > > If none of the board maintatiners sends a NAK after a reasonable time
> > > (3...4 days or so, max 1 week), the we can assume that the  patch  is
> > > OK and should be applied.
> > you ask us multiple time when we touch a board config we do need the board
> > maintainer ack
> > I've 10's of patch that you have nack because I never receive the board
> > maintainer and they still wait to have board Maintainer ack.
> 
> You are right. It's difficult to write don rules that cover all cases
> - which is one reason why I try to avoid writing  down  them  in  the
> first place.
> 
> To me it seems reasonable to ask for maintainer feedback when changes
> affect a small number of boards - in such a  case  there  is  danger,
> that problems might remain unnoticed if the maintainers are not aware
> of  the patch (which might sail under a subject that does not trigger
> their awareness), as nobody else is affected.
> 
> If a patch affects a large number of boards in exactly the same  way,
> such  explicit  triggering  is less needed - it is very likely that a
> few of these boards will be tested in any way, so any  problems  will
> be  noticed  even if no extra notification of board maintainers takes
> place.
> 
> To trigger a maintainer it should be sufficient to send him an e-mail
> (i. e. put him on cc: on the posting). If he  does  not  apply  in  a
> reasonable time, we assume his implicit ACK.
> 
> 
> Sorry that I cannot provide a strict rule with clear decision
> criteria; if in doubt, use common sense.  Thanks.
when increase the u-boot size IMHO we do need to have the board maintainer
ack because we do not known if it will break or not the board

If it's global or arch specifc we all take care the responsability to this
ofcourse we will try to contact the board maintainers and yes not all of them
will ack the patch but we will do our best.
As example we the errno.h cleanup.

Furehermore here all the boards maintainer are active on the ML so it's make
sense to ask them there ack.

But I'd like that we put a rules if the developer that post a patch do his
best to have the board maintainer ack but not succed on it. The decission to
ack it anyway will come to the Custiodians & you at the end.

Best Regards,
J.