On 09/18/2014 09:27 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Thursday, September 11, 2014 at 07:18:00 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
Hi Michal,
Hi,
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 06:56:04 +0200
Michal Simek monstr@monstr.eu wrote:
Hi,
On 09/11/2014 05:09 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 01:33:20 +0200
Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
Hello,
I'd be interested in maintaining u-boot-socfpga repository. So far, we don't have a repo for this platform and there is a large flurry of patches flying around without any kind of central point for them. I'd like to get your formal consent for starting this and if you agree, I'd start sending PR to Albert once the repo is in place.
Me too. I'd like to own u-boot-uniphier to collect Panasonic-SoC-specific changes.
That would be faster and would not disturb Albert.
I am not sure if you need to have separate repo to work like this. I am keeping zynq patches in my microblaze repo and sending pull request to Albert (or Tom now) and there is no problem with that.
The point is that you collect Zynq-specific patches in your own place by yourself and then send a pull-req to Albert or Tom, right?
It does not matter whether it is a separate u-boot-zynq repo or u-boot-microbraze/zynq branch.
I have sent the first series to add the core support of Panasonic SoCs and boards (but it is taking much longer than I have expected) and then I am planning to send more features and boards in the next phase.
What's the difference between what I want to do for Panasonic SoCs and what you usually do for Zynq SoCs?
[...]
I fully support that we should have a repo for the panasonic socs, it's pointless to load Albert by making him apply patches by hand and you have proven numerous times that you do know what you're doing. I really see no blocker for doing this.
+1 on this if Masahiro wants to have separate repo.
Thanks, Michal