[U-Boot] [RFC] Menu Frameworj

Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2009-06-14T11:00:44Z

On 12:44 Sun 14 Jun , Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD,
>
> In message <20090614102930.GA22102@game.jcrosoft.org> you wrote:
> >
> > > > why? They have no wish to come mainline.
> > >
> > > But you do.
> > I do not as I'm not pay to merge them stuff
>
> You want to get *your* code into mainline, and this will not happen
> unless there is a good reason to accept your new, most likely
> incompatible.
>
> > > And I hereby state that I will not accept any new menu system code
> > > into U-Boot mainline until it has been at least checked if there is a
> > > way to unify this with the Openmoko approach.
> > I'll not do it as Openmoko guys do not want to do the effort to come mainline
> > I'm not pay to do this job. Feel free to ask them I'll not waste my time
> > on this ask again
>
> Frankly, that's a pretty stupid point of view. Closing one's eyes and
> intentionally ignoring existing solutions is a waste of efforts.
>
> It's not that you were helping "the Openmoko guys". It's about you
> helping yourself to reduce the amount of work - short term (when it
> comes to designing and implementing it - ok, this chance has already
> been lost) and long term (whenit comes to maintaining it).
you choice to refuse it, you are interrested in the openmoko stuff where I'm
not.
>
> > > You prefer your own code, so please prove that it is so much better
> > > than the Openmoko code. Otherwise your efforts would be better
> > > invested in pulling their code into mainline, and extending / adap-
> > > ting it such that it fits your purposes.
> > I do think we need to not work this way if they want to come mainline THEY need to
> > do this effort I will not do it for them
>
> I don't care what Openmoko is doing. If my understanding is right,
> they don't even use U-Boot any more - it was helpful for them during
> development, but now they don't need and use it any more.
if they do not use it anymore why do I have to waste time on it?
>
> But I do care about code divergence, and I don't want to see thirty
> implementations of the very same feature, all of them different in
> mninor details. I cannot prevent that this happens in so many
> out-of-tree prots, but I can try to prevent that it happens in
> mainline.
so you choice to force me to be out-of-tree, it's well better tks.

Best Regards,