[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/3 v2] devkit3250: add Timll DevKit3250 board initial support

[Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@mleia.com>]

On 15.11.2011 09:48, Igor Grinberg wrote:
> On 11/15/11 09:25, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> Hi Igor,
>>
>> On 15.11.2011 08:42, Igor Grinberg wrote:
>>> Hi Vladimir,
>>>
>>> On 11/14/11 19:43, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>>> This change adds a basic support for Embest/Timll DevKit3250 board,
>>>> NOR and UART are the only supported peripherals for a moment. The board
>>>> doesn't require low-level init, because the initial SDRAM and GPIO
>>>> configuration is performed during kickstart bootloader execution.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Zapolskiy<vz@mleia.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Changes from v1 to v2:
>>>> * corrected address in GPLv2+ licence header in files
>>>
>>> I think you should remove the address part completely,
>>> because next time it changes, will you be around to fix it?
>> I promise I'll be around, that's why I desire to become a maintainer of this board.
>
> Nice! Though I don't think you can foresee the future or do you?

That's a rhetorical question, wasn't it? :)

>>
>>> I know that there are many files already with address, but
>>> to make a big change it is better to start it from small -
>>> say all new coming patches.
>> Well, my small contribution is verifying address in license header found in new files.
>
> Thanks, that is fare enough!
> I want to make sure you understand, that having the right
> address in the license statement is not a blocker.
>
I hope that Albert being ARM custodian thinks similarly, because for a 
long time I didn't get any feedback about my change (your comment is the 
single one given from October 25), and by some reason it is still not 
integrated...

>>
>> I'd like to invite Wolfgang into discussion to get his opinion about the topic. Well, I do not feel myself as a lawer to allege that removing address info from the license notice is ok. Has it already been discussed in the mailing list?
>
> Actually, you don't have to be a lawyer to verify
> if there is a requirement to have the postal address
> (that changes from time to time) in the license statement.
> AFAIK, there is no such requirement and the fact that huge
> amount of files has a wrong postal address just emphasizes
> this.
>
> What I'm proposing here is a way to spare the effort of changing
> the postal address in the future. And if no one cares for the
> right address, then why bother writing it in the source code?
> To make the source code larger?
>
> And yes of course, I would like to here what Wolfgang has to say
> about this.

Actually this topic might be discussed in a separate mail thread.

>>
>>>> * removed clean and distclean targets from board makefile
>>>> * do not set machine id explicitly, if CONFIG_MACH_TYPE is defined
>>>> * minor indentation cleanups
>>>>
>>>>    board/timll/devkit3250/Makefile     |   44 +++++++++++++
>>>>    board/timll/devkit3250/devkit3250.c |   71 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    boards.cfg                          |    3 +-
>>>>    include/configs/devkit3250.h        |  121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    4 files changed, 238 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>>    create mode 100644 board/timll/devkit3250/Makefile
>>>>    create mode 100644 board/timll/devkit3250/devkit3250.c
>>>>    create mode 100644 include/configs/devkit3250.h
>>>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>

-- 
With best wishes,
Vladimir