Hi Wolfgang,

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Wolfgang Denk wd@denx.de wrote:

Dear Andy,

In message <004e01cd6a51$57d5ff70$0781fe50$@pont@sdcsystems.com> you wrote:

...

I have been and had a look at the specification that you have posted and am happy to get my hands dirty helping with implement and test this.

Thanks in advance.

And a big thanks from me too :)

Before we 'dig in' and implement it, we really need to make sure that the specification:

a) Accurately describes something that will address the current problems we are experiencing in maintaining U-Boot b) Not, as far as we can currently tell, have scalability issues c) Be flexible enough to grow

...

I know that a good proportion (possibly even all of it) could be implemented in Python but is there a preference or consensus on what would be the best language to do it in?

Speaking for myself, I have no strict preferences.

Me either

It may make a lot of sense to look into existing code - much of what we neeed (mail processing, collecting follow-ups, Acks etc.) is already availabe in PatchWork - can we re-use this code instead of re-inventing the wheel?

Exactly. As Patchwork is Python, it makes sense to keep going with Python for PatchTrack

However, I was thinking that PatchTrack would have a modular design and implementation and that we should not restrict the language that the modules are written in. Although, this may come later. In particular, I can well imagine some of the 'static tests' being implemented as simple shell scripts

Regards,

Graeme