[U-Boot] patches never reviewed

Jin Zhengxiong-R64188
2013-06-07T05:55:20Z

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Angelo Dureghello [mailto:sysamfw at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2013 10:21 PM
> To: u-boot at 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