[U-Boot] Custodians, Maintainers and old platforms

[Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>]

Dear Stefan Kristiansson,

> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 05:28:18PM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> > Hey all,
> > 
> > (I had attempted to bcc this to all listed maintainer, but that upset
> > Google greatly.  I'll send this out manually instead later).
> > 
> > I'd like to put this out here for custodians and maintainers to
> > consider, especially in light of the device model work that's not just
> > coming but has already started being posted.
> > 
> > One of the keys to the success of U-Boot has been the number of
> > platforms that are supported.  But part of supporting platforms is
> > needing people to volunteer to maintain them long term and help with
> > testing changes and so forth.  So first of all, I've just tagged
> > v2012.10-rc1.  Please give this at least a basic test on whatever
> > platforms you're able to.
> > 
> > Second, with this, my next branch is now open and I'd like to start it
> > by asking that platforms that people wish to abandon be removed.  With
> > the device model, lots of code will need adjusting and while it's
> > mechanical in ways, it still needs to be run-time tested.  And it's
> > changes that someone must do.  I know others have suggested adding or
> > better publicizing our to-remove file.  But one of the advantages of git
> > is that it's easy to bring platforms back, should someone later wish to
> > bring it back.  But this also requires the removal to be done cleanly.
> > 
> > All of that said, I would like to stress that if you maintain a platform
> > and you wish to help with the testing and perhaps even the conversion
> > effort, no matter the age of the platform it would be welcome and
> > appreciated.
> > 
> > And finally, if everyone really wants to go another direction with old
> > platforms, I'm open to discussion of course.  I just want to miminize
> > work done on platforms that aren't active and we don't know if they will
> > come back.
> 
> This made me realise that there are two old OpenRISC patches floating
> around that hasn't been applied to mainline.
> 
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/142511/
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/142510/
> 
> Apart from that I'm not experiencing any problems on this arch.

Tom, I think we should apply them please.

> It brings me to another question though,
> would it be possible to get a custodian tree for OpenRISC?

CCing Detlev.

> Stefan

Best regards,
Marek Vasut