Re: [PATCH v2 00/56] expo: Various features and improvements

[Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2254 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 01:18:25AM +0000, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 at 03:47, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 07:05:47AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> >
> > > This series collects together some new features for expo to make it more
> > > useful for boot menus:
> > >
> > > - measurement and display of multi-line text objects
> > > - internal alignment for objects (e.g. centred text)
> > > - editable strings in text fields
> > > - new 'box' object to draw a rectangle
> > > - highlighting of menu items, rather than just relying on a pointer
> > >
> > > Expo's boot menu is restructured so that it is possible to iterate
> > > through various bootdevs and update the menu as new ones are found. This
> > > is more in keeping with how bootstd works.
> > >
> > > A new textedit object is added, intended to provide a simple text
> > > editor. Future work will complete this.
> > >
> > > With this series the boot menu has a better layout and appearance.
> >
> > Did I already say this for v2 and forget? It looks like you forgot,
> > again, to split the expo stuff out from everything else, which others
> > might review.
> 
> This series is all expo stuff. Can you please explain your objection
> more clearly? I still don't really understand.

All of those patches that don't start with "expo:" aren't expo changes,
they're changes to other parts of the codebase.

> > [snip]
> > > base-commit: 37ef92a972663c6de1b81d24d2ca5cfd664fc6df
> > > branch: schd2
> >
> > Of course, not being on top of mainline, no one should spend much time
> > on this anyhow.
> 
> As I thought we agreed, it is helpful to review patches so we can keep
> the trees in sync so far as possible. I take your point that few will
> be interested in expo and there may not be many comments, but sending
> it makes it available for review and potentially sending a PR for your
> tree at some point.

Yes, said at some point we should try it. And it's been a failure, so
I'm saying to stop. If it's not based on top of one of the mainline
branches, don't post it. Enough other contributors have expressed their
unhappiness at reviewing non-mainline code.

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 659 bytes --]