From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from jdl.com (jdl.com [208.123.74.7]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 348EEDDDF7 for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:03:13 +1000 (EST) To: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Move DTC Technical specs out of b-w-o.txt into DTC Repo In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 12 Jul 2007 02:01:07 CDT." References: <1184190325.25384.125.camel@ld0161-tx32> Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 08:03:07 -0500 From: Jon Loeliger Message-Id: Cc: "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , So, like, the other day Kumar Gala mumbled: > > On Jul 11, 2007, at 4:45 PM, Jon Loeliger wrote: > > > Folks, > > > > Here are two patches, one to the kernel, the other to > > the DTC repo, that moves the technical description > > portions of the booting-without-of.txt documentation > > out of the kernel and into the DTC repository. > > Why remove it from the kernel? It seems like this part should change > infrequently and it would be good to keep its documentation with the > kernel as well? Well, all the usual reasons. It will be improving over time, and it makes much more sense to keep the documntation about a system within the repository for that system. And rather than have two copies, one of which will get out of sync, I feel it makes more sense to relocate the DTC technical descriptions to the DTC repository where it belongs. And speaking of which, I will also be removing the already extant and already way out of data copy of the booting-without-of.txt from the DTC repo as well. If a small summary of say, DTC command line usage is left in b-w-o.txt as a Quick Ref, I'm fine with that, of course. Thanks, jdl