From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nigel Kukard Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 08:31:31 +0000 Subject: [Buildroot] Buildroot maintainer and stable releases In-Reply-To: <87y6xnldvt.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> References: <87prj1v4dy.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <1231243376.32308.52.camel@elrond.atmel.com> <87vdsssiwo.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <200901070409.42558.markus.heidelberg@web.de> <87y6xnldvt.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> Message-ID: <49646863.1000403@lbsd.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net > Ulf> You have complained about size of patches, and > Ulf> that is why there is a prepatched toolchain for AVR32. > Ulf> If that is not considered to be OK, then the several > Ulf> MBytes of patches has to be introduced into the trunk. > >> > >> It's not the size in bytes as such, it's the special casing and > >> (effectively) black box patches. Even when you test your changes on > >> multiple archs there's a fairly big change that you break stuff for > >> avr32/at91, or that you guys break it for the other archs. The same > >> with moving packages to new versions or removing old versions, you > >> cannot expect other people to forward port those arch specific > >> patches. > > Markus> Yes, mplayer for example is more than 2 years old and includes a huge > Markus> avr32 patch. > > Exactly. Who will redo this patch if I bump the mplayer version Perfect example why we need the MAINTAINERS file, ie. who is responsible for keeping the $arch/target patches up to date? -N