[U-Boot-Users] ARM custodian change
Here a short announcement about a change in the U-Boot ARM custodianship:
Since the ARM platform is so broad and has multiple vendor specific "sub-architectures" it seemed necessary to add new U-Boot custodian branches for those architectures. Fortunately we had some volunteers. Here the list:
u-boot-at91 (Atmel ARM) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-pxa (XScale) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-s3c24xx (Samsung ARM) Harald Welte
Again, thanks a lot to the (new) custodians. Your help is really appreciated.
Best regards, Stefan
===================================================================== DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office@denx.de =====================================================================
In message 200803180607.16553.sr@denx.de you wrote:
Here a short announcement about a change in the U-Boot ARM custodianship:
Since the ARM platform is so broad and has multiple vendor specific "sub-architectures" it seemed necessary to add new U-Boot custodian branches for those architectures. Fortunately we had some volunteers. Here the list:
u-boot-at91 (Atmel ARM) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-pxa (XScale) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-s3c24xx (Samsung ARM) Harald Welte
The new repositories have been set up and should be operational now.
Viele Grüße,
Wolfgang Denk
Here a short announcement about a change in the U-Boot ARM custodianship:
Since the ARM platform is so broad and has multiple vendor specific "sub-architectures" it seemed necessary to add new U-Boot custodian branches for those architectures. Fortunately we had some volunteers. Here the list:
u-boot-at91 (Atmel ARM) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-pxa (XScale) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-s3c24xx (Samsung ARM) Harald Welte
Again, thanks a lot to the (new) custodians. Your help is really appreciated.
Would it not be better if the Atmel ARM was handled by the Atmel AT91 Product line
Best Regards Ulf Samuelsson
On Tuesday 18 March 2008, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
Here a short announcement about a change in the U-Boot ARM custodianship:
Since the ARM platform is so broad and has multiple vendor specific "sub-architectures" it seemed necessary to add new U-Boot custodian branches for those architectures. Fortunately we had some volunteers. Here the list:
u-boot-at91 (Atmel ARM) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-pxa (XScale) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-s3c24xx (Samsung ARM) Harald Welte
Again, thanks a lot to the (new) custodians. Your help is really appreciated.
Would it not be better if the Atmel ARM was handled by the Atmel AT91 Product line
Could be, I really don't know. I don't remember seeing Atmel ARM patches posted or reviewed by other Atmel than yourself.
So for the time being, we gladly accept that Jean-Christophe volunteered to take over this custodianship. From my point of view, he is doing a very good job with his other U-Boot activities. So I expect that the AT91 support could be handled better from now on.
But again, we are open for other suggestions here too. If you think someone at Atmel is better suited to do this job, then please let us know.
BTW: If somebody else feels suited to take over some open custodianships (PCI, RTC, HWMON come to my mind right now), please let us know too. :)
Thanks.
Best regards, Stefan
===================================================================== DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office@denx.de =====================================================================
On Tuesday 18 March 2008, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
Here a short announcement about a change in the U-Boot ARM custodianship:
Since the ARM platform is so broad and has multiple vendor specific "sub-architectures" it seemed necessary to add new U-Boot custodian branches for those architectures. Fortunately we had some volunteers. Here the list:
u-boot-at91 (Atmel ARM) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-pxa (XScale) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard u-boot-s3c24xx (Samsung ARM) Harald Welte
Again, thanks a lot to the (new) custodians. Your help is really appreciated.
Would it not be better if the Atmel ARM was handled by the Atmel AT91 Product line
Could be, I really don't know. I don't remember seeing Atmel ARM patches posted or reviewed by other Atmel than yourself.
They were sent in 3-4 years ago. Since there were no response, they lost interest, and have not tried since then. They are maintaining a separate U-Boot source package.
So for the time being, we gladly accept that Jean-Christophe volunteered to take over this custodianship. From my point of view, he is doing a very good job with his other U-Boot activities. So I expect that the AT91 support could be handled better from now on.
Have no criticism against Jean-Christophe, but I think that support for new chips may be available earlier with the AT91 team.
But again, we are open for other suggestions here too. If you think someone at Atmel is better suited to do this job, then please let us know.
I will not have the time to maintain, that is for sure.
I think that the issue needs to be raised with the AT91 team, but it might be that the AT91 team decides that they rather work closely with Jean-Christophe.
Andrew Victor is doing a good job maintaining the AT91 Linux port so there is a precedent for this already.
BTW: If somebody else feels suited to take over some open custodianships (PCI, RTC, HWMON come to my mind right now), please let us know too. :)
Thanks.
Best regards, Stefan
Best Regards Ulf Samuelsson
On Wednesday 19 March 2008, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
Would it not be better if the Atmel ARM was handled by the Atmel AT91 Product line
Could be, I really don't know. I don't remember seeing Atmel ARM patches posted or reviewed by other Atmel than yourself.
They were sent in 3-4 years ago. Since there were no response, they lost interest, and have not tried since then. They are maintaining a separate U-Boot source package.
Too bad. I think it would be a good idea, if "they" would try to work with the "official" U-Boot community again. Now with the custodian framework in place, some problems of the past should be solved.
So for the time being, we gladly accept that Jean-Christophe volunteered to take over this custodianship. From my point of view, he is doing a very good job with his other U-Boot activities. So I expect that the AT91 support could be handled better from now on.
Have no criticism against Jean-Christophe, but I think that support for new chips may be available earlier with the AT91 team.
Right. That's for sure.
But again, we are open for other suggestions here too. If you think someone at Atmel is better suited to do this job, then please let us know.
I will not have the time to maintain, that is for sure.
Understood.
I think that the issue needs to be raised with the AT91 team, but it might be that the AT91 team decides that they rather work closely with Jean-Christophe.
That's of course also an option.
Best regards, Stefan
===================================================================== DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office@denx.de =====================================================================
On Wednesday 19 March 2008, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
Would it not be better if the Atmel ARM was handled by the Atmel AT91 Product line
Could be, I really don't know. I don't remember seeing Atmel ARM patches posted or reviewed by other Atmel than yourself.
They were sent in 3-4 years ago. Since there were no response, they lost interest, and have not tried since then. They are maintaining a separate U-Boot source package.
Too bad. I think it would be a good idea, if "they" would try to work with the "official" U-Boot community again. Now with the custodian framework in place, some problems of the past should be solved.
I 'bcc' our own "Jean-Christophe" (Zettel) running the AT91 apps team and he will have to discuss with the S/W team and decide.
So for the time being, we gladly accept that Jean-Christophe volunteered to take over this custodianship. From my point of view, he is doing a very good job with his other U-Boot activities. So I expect that the AT91 support could be handled better from now on.
Have no criticism against Jean-Christophe, but I think that support for new chips may be available earlier with the AT91 team.
Right. That's for sure.
But again, we are open for other suggestions here too. If you think someone at Atmel is better suited to do this job, then please let us know.
I will not have the time to maintain, that is for sure.
Understood.
I think that the issue needs to be raised with the AT91 team, but it might be that the AT91 team decides that they rather work closely with Jean-Christophe.
That's of course also an option.
Best regards, Stefan
Best Regards Ulf Samuelsson ulf@atmel.com Atmel Nordic AB Mail: Box 2033, 174 02 Sundbyberg, Sweden Visit: Kavallerivägen 24, 174 58 Sundbyberg, Sweden Phone +46 (8) 441 54 22 Fax +46 (8) 441 54 29 GSM +46 (706) 22 44 57
Join the Atmel 2008 Microcontroller Seminar April 7-10. Introducing X-Mega, AVR32 and ARM9. STK600 Kit included. Register at Acte, Arrow or EBV webpage.
Technical support when I am not available: AT90 AVR Applications Group: mailto:avr@atmel.com AT91 ARM Applications Group: mailto:at91support@atmel.com AVR32 Applications Group mailto:avr32@atmel.com http://www.avrfreaks.net/; http://avr32linux.org/ http://www.at91.com/ ; http://www.linux4sam.org/
Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson <at> atmel.com> writes:
Too bad. I think it would be a good idea, if "they" would try to work with the "official" U-Boot community again. Now with the custodian framework in place, some problems of the past should be solved.
I 'bcc' our own "Jean-Christophe" (Zettel) running the AT91 apps team and he will have to discuss with the S/W team and decide.
"We" (the AT91 S/W team) are glad to work with the "one and only" U-Boot community. It is the first step to move to the last codebase that is the hardest.
The work done by Stelian Pop to integrate AT91CAP9 shows the way for all AT91SAM9 support. We will for sure work with Stelian Pop, Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard , yourself the whole AT91 U-Boot community to have a smooth transition to the latest codebase.
Regards,
Le jeudi 20 mars 2008 à 17:36 +0000, Nicolas Ferre a écrit :
Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson <at> atmel.com> writes:
Too bad. I think it would be a good idea, if "they" would try to work with the "official" U-Boot community again. Now with the custodian framework in place, some problems of the past should be solved.
I 'bcc' our own "Jean-Christophe" (Zettel) running the AT91 apps team and he will have to discuss with the S/W team and decide.
"We" (the AT91 S/W team) are glad to work with the "one and only" U-Boot community. It is the first step to move to the last codebase that is the hardest.
The work done by Stelian Pop to integrate AT91CAP9 shows the way for all AT91SAM9 support. We will for sure work with Stelian Pop, Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard , yourself the whole AT91 U-Boot community to have a smooth transition to the latest codebase.
As a matter of fact, Atmel has already provided me with the necessary hardware. I will shortly, as time permits, start feeding the list with AT91SAM patches...
On Thursday 20 March 2008, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson <at> atmel.com> writes:
Too bad. I think it would be a good idea, if "they" would try to work with the "official" U-Boot community again. Now with the custodian framework in place, some problems of the past should be solved.
I 'bcc' our own "Jean-Christophe" (Zettel) running the AT91 apps team and he will have to discuss with the S/W team and decide.
"We" (the AT91 S/W team) are glad to work with the "one and only" U-Boot community.
That's really great news.
It is the first step to move to the last codebase that is the hardest.
Right.
The work done by Stelian Pop to integrate AT91CAP9 shows the way for all AT91SAM9 support. We will for sure work with Stelian Pop, Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard , yourself the whole AT91 U-Boot community to have a smooth transition to the latest codebase.
Thank you Nicolas. Really appreciated.
Best regards, Stefan
===================================================================== DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office@denx.de =====================================================================
On Thursday 20 March 2008, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson <at> atmel.com> writes:
Too bad. I think it would be a good idea, if "they" would try to work with the "official" U-Boot community again. Now with the custodian framework in place, some problems of the past should be solved.
I 'bcc' our own "Jean-Christophe" (Zettel) running the AT91 apps team and he will have to discuss with the S/W team and decide.
"We" (the AT91 S/W team) are glad to work with the "one and only" U-Boot community.
That's really great news.
It is the first step to move to the last codebase that is the hardest.
Right.
The work done by Stelian Pop to integrate AT91CAP9 shows the way for all AT91SAM9 support. We will for sure work with Stelian Pop, Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard , yourself the whole AT91 U-Boot community to have a smooth transition to the latest codebase.
Thank you Nicolas. Really appreciated.
Best regards, Stefan
Yes, I think we have an agreement between all involved parties then!
Best Regards Ulf Samuelsson
Ulf Samuelsson <ulf.samuelsson <at> atmel.com> writes:
On Tuesday 18 March 2008, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
Here a short announcement about a change in the U-Boot ARM custodianship:
Since the ARM platform is so broad and has multiple vendor specific "sub-architectures" it seemed necessary to add new U-Boot custodian branches for those architectures. Fortunately we had some volunteers. Here the list:
u-boot-at91 (Atmel ARM) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard
[..]
Would it not be better if the Atmel ARM was handled by the Atmel AT91 Product line
We (the AT91 software team) do not have this opinion. It is very enriching to work with people from the community.
Could be, I really don't know. I don't remember seeing Atmel ARM patches posted or reviewed by other Atmel than yourself.
They were sent in 3-4 years ago. Since there were no response, they lost interest, and have not tried since then. They are maintaining a separate U-Boot source package.
Ulf, we do not lose interest ! We simply do not have the opportunity to rebase and test our work against the latest developments for all chips&boards. This opportunity is here now and we will be glad to contribute.
So for the time being, we gladly accept that Jean-Christophe volunteered to take over this custodianship. From my point of view, he is doing a very good job with his other U-Boot activities. So I expect that the AT91 support could be handled better from now on.
Have no criticism against Jean-Christophe, but I think that support for new chips may be available earlier with the AT91 team.
We will, for sure, work with Jean-Christophe and all AT91 u-boot contributors for new chips introduction.
But again, we are open for other suggestions here too. If you think someone at Atmel is better suited to do this job, then please let us know.
I will not have the time to maintain, that is for sure.
I think that the issue needs to be raised with the AT91 team, but it might be that the AT91 team decides that they rather work closely with Jean-Christophe.
Andrew Victor is doing a good job maintaining the AT91 Linux port so there is a precedent for this already.
It is exactly the kind of relationship we would like to build with the new custodian.
Regards,
On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:12:36 +0000 (UTC) Nicolas Ferre nicolas.ferre@atmel.com wrote:
u-boot-at91 (Atmel ARM) Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard
Ulf, we do not lose interest ! We simply do not have the opportunity to rebase and test our work against the latest developments for all chips&boards. This opportunity is here now and we will be glad to contribute.
I'm very happy to hear that!
I think sharing drivers between AVR32 and AT91 has made both platforms better on Linux, and I hope we can do the same thing with u-boot (Stelian's patches are certainly a good start.)
Haavard
participants (6)
-
Haavard Skinnemoen -
Nicolas Ferre -
Stefan Roese -
Stelian Pop -
Ulf Samuelsson -
Wolfgang Denk