Dear Scott,

please be sure before replying to verify the "history" of the threads. This patch is around for more than one year.

1) i was quite sure that last patch body was ok. Please let me know eventually what are these issues, if any, with a "feedback".

2) in most of the cases i always included Mr, Jason Jim in CC, that in most of the cases never reply. Maybe could be the case to verify this and clarify with him.

3) this "subject" is in this form because is not the 1st but the second reminder to review the patches, and not a patch.

You told me board: add support for amcore board is not correct,

but of course you can check the patchwork site and see other title like that "passed". And in case i fix this, someone will say the m68k in the title is wrong, becouse is a board patch.

To the community, ----------------

i fixed several and several things on this patch over more than one year, following several and several feedbacks from many of you.

I was expecting a minimal of flexibility and a final approval, since i contributed also for bug fixing sometime, and since some other boards has been approved wthout too many troubles.

I have seen this is depending much from the cpu/arch tree maintainer or custodian. And the custodian of Coldfire tree from Freescale seems is not partecipating to much in this patch.

The result is that there is no way to have the board nor m5307 cpu patch accepted becouse again, for the 100th time, there is something not correct.

I am not stupid, and understanding now that whatever would be my changes, patch will still be stopped and stopped from a different guy.

I don't want to accuse anyone of any form of discrimination, but i stop to contribute for now, almost for m68k branch.

With Best Regards,

Angelo Dureghello

On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 12:54:31PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:

On 06/04/2013 12:47:47 PM, Scott Wood wrote:

...

On 06/03/2013 03:51:48 PM, Angelo Dureghello wrote:

...

Dear All,

i worked hardly through v6 for approval of this AMCORE Coldfire board support.

Waited patiently for review of this patches:

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/215904/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/214686/

then asked again later for the review:

http://marc.info/?l=u-boot&m=136059580219228&w=2

still, at today, i had no feedbacks.

Unfortunately (i can be wrong) but i have the impression at freescale no-one have time to spend for following this board addition.

Jason Jin is the Coldfire custodian. I've added him on CC here; please be sure to put him on CC when you send Coldfire patches or inquiries.

Sigh, and of course the list ate the CC. So for all I know maybe you had him on CC to begin with...

Another thing that can help is using better subject lines. "patches review" isn't going to let people know what sort of patches they are and if it's their responsibility or not. Likewise, "board: add support for amcore board" doesn't have m68k or coldfire in the title (whereas "board:" is redundant).

-Scott

-----Original Message----- From: Angelo Dureghello [mailto:sysamfw@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2013 10:21 PM To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Cc: Jin Zhengxiong-R64188 Subject: Re: [U-Boot] patches never reviewed

Dear Scott,

please be sure before replying to verify the "history" of the threads. This patch is around for more than one year.

1. i was quite sure that last patch body was ok. Please let me know

eventually what are these issues, if any, with a "feedback".

2. in most of the cases i always included Mr, Jason Jim in CC, that in

most of the cases never reply. Maybe could be the case to verify this and clarify with him.

3. this "subject" is in this form because is not the 1st but the second

reminder to review the patches, and not a patch.

You told me board: add support for amcore board is not correct,

but of course you can check the patchwork site and see other title like that "passed". And in case i fix this, someone will say the m68k in the title is wrong, becouse is a board patch.

To the community,

i fixed several and several things on this patch over more than one year, following several and several feedbacks from many of you.

I was expecting a minimal of flexibility and a final approval, since i contributed also for bug fixing sometime, and since some other boards has been approved wthout too many troubles.

I have seen this is depending much from the cpu/arch tree maintainer or custodian. And the custodian of Coldfire tree from Freescale seems is not partecipating to much in this patch.

The result is that there is no way to have the board nor m5307 cpu patch accepted becouse again, for the 100th time, there is something not correct.

I am not stupid, and understanding now that whatever would be my changes, patch will still be stopped and stopped from a different guy.

I don't want to accuse anyone of any form of discrimination, but i stop to contribute for now, almost for m68k branch.

[Jason Jin-R64188] I'm sorry for late response for this V6 version patches. But you really need to send the patch by git-send-email instead of by attachments, so everybody can review it in the mail. Please resend it. Thanks.

On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 12:54:31PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:

...

On 06/04/2013 12:47:47 PM, Scott Wood wrote:

...

On 06/03/2013 03:51:48 PM, Angelo Dureghello wrote:

...

Dear All,

i worked hardly through v6 for approval of this AMCORE Coldfire board support.

Waited patiently for review of this patches:

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/215904/ http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/214686/

then asked again later for the review:

http://marc.info/?l=u-boot&m=136059580219228&w=2

still, at today, i had no feedbacks.

Unfortunately (i can be wrong) but i have the impression at freescale no-one have time to spend for following this board addition.

Jason Jin is the Coldfire custodian. I've added him on CC here; please be sure to put him on CC when you send Coldfire patches or inquiries.

Sigh, and of course the list ate the CC. So for all I know maybe you had him on CC to begin with...

Another thing that can help is using better subject lines. "patches review" isn't going to let people know what sort of patches they are and if it's their responsibility or not. Likewise, "board: add support for amcore board" doesn't have m68k or coldfire in the title (whereas "board:" is redundant).

-Scott