On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 03:54:01PM -0700, Steve Rae wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 03:13:37PM -0700, Steve Rae wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 03:01:10PM -0700, Steve Rae wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 11:55:49AM -0700, Steve Rae wrote:
> Tom & Albert, > Please approve the creation of a custodian repo for the Broadcom (arm) boards. > ( Wolfgang already has my public key... ) > > Wolfgang stated: > > Before I can set up a new custodian repo, please post your > > offer on the U-Boot mailing list - I think the chips in question > > belong to the ARM architecture (?), so both the ARM custodian (Albert) > > and Tom should agree with the creation of such a new repo. Once I > > have their "go" it is only a matter of minutes.
So, I do have a few BCM patches outstanding (and I'm build testing them now). ELC kicked -rc1 out a week (I'll be tagging it once I have this series happy enough to push out with it). Are you expecting the volume of boards to increase? Thanks!
No -- only planning to add 2 new boards.... It is just that with the current process, I waiting "months" to get patches applied - so Marek suggested that maybe I need to be a custodian, so that I can move things along....
Er, months? Sorry, I'm not seeing it right away at least: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?submitter=64015&state=* (and questions about how did .... get into state ... ? are answered with "I took a stab at it").
how about: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/list/?submitter=64015&state=&... shows two outstanding from Feb 9 !!! (plus the three that I assume you are currently working on.....)
... yes, the gadget ones that wouldn't go through a BCM tree anyhow :)
But... I think I mis-assigned them in patchwork and it should be in my queue anyhow, sorry.
OK -- then I am OK to abandon this "custodian request" .....
I guess I just need to know: -- what is a "typical" timeframe for getting stuff applied, and -- "how" and "who" to nudge in order to get things moving along - when that timeframe has expired....
Well, this was probably the outside edge of it. I saw these before making v2016.03 but since it's a tricky enough area I didn't want to grab them before release. Then I figured they would get picked up by the custodian for v2016.05-rc1. They didn't since I mis-assigned them.
-- how to escalate when those "nudges" seem to be ignored....
Well, if something is posted after $X-rc1 and not merged by $((X + 1))-rc1, please reply to the release email asking if someone can grab $patches as they've been around for a while.