From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chin Liang See <clsee@altera.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 20:07:11 -0500
Subject: [U-Boot] u-boot-socfpga repository
In-Reply-To: <20140914164656.GC25506@bill-the-cat>
References: <20140911171431.GW25506@bill-the-cat>
	<54122DE5.1080006@opensource.altera.com>
	<20140912052527.B0714382307@gemini.denx.de>
	<54133B22.2090509@opensource.altera.com>
	<20140912194616.7270238222C@gemini.denx.de>
	<54136276.6040109@opensource.altera.com>
	<20140912221446.F010F38222C@gemini.denx.de>
	<541373AD.4020902@opensource.altera.com>
	<20140912225149.21EF438222C@gemini.denx.de>
	<5415BC00.6090407@opensource.altera.com>
	<20140914164656.GC25506@bill-the-cat>
Message-ID: <1410743231.2077.9.camel@clsee-VirtualBox.altera.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi Tom,

On Sun, 2014-09-14 at 12:46 -0400, ZY - trini wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 11:02:08AM -0500, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> > Hi Wolfgang,
> > 
> > On 9/12/14, 5:51 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > > Dear Dinh,
> > > 
> > > In message <541373AD.4020902@opensource.altera.com> you wrote:
> > Also, I went back and look at the "flurry" of patches for socfpga, and I
> > must commend Tom Rini on a fantastic job for applying the patches. I was
> > only able to find 1 patch that needed addressing:
> > 
> > [socfpga: generic board for socfpga] from Pavel Machek
> 
> Can you test it, and Reviewed-by/Acked-by/Tested-by or something the
> patch?  patchwork collects these and that is a big part of our review
> and merge process here.
> 

This is actually a big patch which should be split to smaller patch.
Nevertheless, I already started reviewing it last week and hopefully can
get it reviewed by today.


> > For now, I have it applied to
> > 
> > git://git.rocketboards.org/u-boot-socfpga-next.git for_next  branch.
> 
> Here's a difference from the Linux kernel community.  We really do want
> to use a git tree hosted on git.denx.de for pulls.
> 
> > There are a few patches that needs to be addressed in the mailing list,
> > but I don't see any other patches that needs to be applied at this
> > moment. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
> > 
> > To summarize, have we failed as maintainers of socfpga that you would
> > need to assign somebody else to be the custodian for socfpga? If
> > so, I apologize and would like for you to reconsider your position and
> > let us try to do a better job.
> 
> Just like in the kernel community, it's a position that has to be
> earned.  I understand there should be big round of patches posted soon,
> which will be a good place to see follow-through.  There's also the
> denali NAND patches which are blocking another SoC from going in as well
> which I'm hoping to see v10 of posted sometime in the coming week.
> 

The v10 NAND patch was posted last week. In fact, the patch was working
for both Altera and Panasonic since v7. It takes up to v10 as I received
some late comments. 

At same time, just fyi, there is slowness for for last few patches as I
was on paternity leave for last few weeks :)

Thanks
Chin Liang