Dear Dirk Behme,
In message 4A9165AF.6050705@googlemail.com you wrote:
First, as already discussed, I don't like this and feel fine with board/omap3. So a formal NACK from me, knowing that it most probably will be overridden by some others ;)
Indeed. It's the current rule how we organize boards, and your personal preferences are here indeed not reason enough to reject these patches. Sorry.
Second, where do you know from that all these boards are from TI? Are you sure that they are not from SpectrumDigital, Mistral or DigiKey etc?
Well, if you have better information, then please fill in the gaps here.
Third, I don't like the mixing of board and vendor name as directory names. It seems to me that where you think you know the vendor, you use the vendor name, and where you seem to not know it, you use the board name. So, to be consistent, and to overcome vendor name issue above, I'd like to use the board name everywhere. That is:
No. The rule is that when we have a vendor with several boars (say, more than 2), then we will create a vendor directory.
I understand that here the conditoon "vendor has more than 2 boards" is fulfilled in several cases. Agreed?
To improve this even more, something like this would be nice:
You may consider it nice, we don't.
So if anything in JC's patch is incorrect, please provide information to correct it. From what I know, the patch looks OK to me (but I have to admit that I don't know either who the actual board vendors are).
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk