On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 08:00:57PM +0200, Luc Verhaegen wrote: > I fully agree with the earlier stuff, but is there any reason to keep > this in the v3 tree? People will not be that unhappy if they're required > to pull in the flashrom utility seperately,
I fully agree, it's not required. Some developers have expressed in the past that they like to keep all our code together in one 'svn co' bunch. I don't have a strong opinion either way (as long as we don't have _forks_ of code for v1 and v2, which is why we now use svn:externals). > and i'm not sure, but i > think that in some cases, the likes of uniflash can be used to flash a > linuxbios too. Definately, not everyone needs flashrom. > I personally don't think there should be a place in the v3 tree for a > utility like this, as it leads an almost completely independent life. Yes, and it should. The copy in v2/v3 is merely there for convenience. Uwe. -- http://www.hermann-uwe.de | http://www.holsham-traders.de http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
