> I'm not so sure what we argue about here. The hypothetical case that
> it's hard to hook things up for build testing early, right? I've haven't
> seen that yet.
Let's step back for a moment. The proposal as I understand is that all
code that lands in the tree must be hooked up so it's built by
J
Patrick,
> Should we add stub mainboards for new chipsets that build the code as a
> way to make sure nobody else inadvertently breaks things (at least not too
> bad)?
>
That's an interesting idea. A benefit that I see is that it's then
demonstrable how changes and additions affect the mainboar
Hi Marshall,
thank you very much for your huge elaboration. I had already given up
all hope to see public communication from AMD. That's really great to
see things change.
It's a lot to digest, I'll try to just briefly comment on my main
concern, why I called it controversial: the unclear blob si
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 3:57 PM Patrick Georgi via coreboot <
coreboot@coreboot.org> wrote:
> Hi Marshall,
>
> thanks for that cohesive report and insight into your development process
> and the trade-offs involved.
>
> Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 21:12 Uhr schrieb Marshall Dawson <
> marshalldawson.
On 1/27/20, 10:56 AM, "Nico Huber" wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
thanks for your email. It's become very rare that developers take part
in mailing-list discussions when they are asked to. So it's really
appreciated.
Jumping to conclusion without knowing context could cause distractio
Hi Marshall,
thanks for that cohesive report and insight into your development process
and the trade-offs involved.
Am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020 um 21:12 Uhr schrieb Marshall Dawson <
marshalldawson...@gmail.com>:
> Instead, please give me the opportunity to review any of your changes that
> touch the
Despite my frustration here, I’m optimistic that this discussion can serve
to close out the thread “Copy-first platform additions (was: Re: Re:
Proposal to add teeth to our Gerrit guidelines)”
https://mail.coreboot.org/hyperkitty/list/coreboot@coreboot.org/thread/JHXCPNYA7IGPNXXLVS3FGJ32I3XS55ZE/#X
Hi Jonathan,
thanks for your email. It's become very rare that developers take part
in mailing-list discussions when they are asked to. So it's really
appreciated.
On 27.01.20 17:21, Jonathan Zhang (Infra) wrote:
> On 1/26/20, 11:32 AM, "Nico Huber" wrote:
>>
>> Hi David,
>>
>>On 26.01.20 2
On 1/26/20, 11:32 AM, "Nico Huber" wrote:
Hi David,
On 26.01.20 20:15, David Hendricks wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 4:44 PM Nico Huber wrote:
>> There are currently two new platforms in development that seem to
>> have trouble with public binaries (which would be
Hi David,
I'm not so sure what we argue about here. The hypothetical case that
it's hard to hook things up for build testing early, right? I've haven't
seen that yet.
On 26.01.20 23:49, David Hendricks wrote:
>> On 26.01.20 19:46, David Hendricks wrote:
>> Of course, there'll always be a gap
Hey Martin,
On 26.01.20 21:21, Martin Roth wrote:
> The picasso platforms are being worked on in a private repo because
> it's not bootable at coreboot.org. It's not bootable because the
> patches that would make it bootable were delayed and rejected.
I'm sorry that you had trouble with your pat
11 matches
Mail list logo
