On Fri, 2023-10-13 at 03:09 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, Josef Holzmayr wrote:
> > It has been discussed at numerous occasions. The main blocker is: we
> > need a commitment for the maintenance. So if a high-ranking member
> > decides to push forwards with this and
On Fri, 13 Oct 2023, Alexander Kanavin wrote:
> Can you clarify please what LTS means here?
>
> Alex
>
> On Fri 13. Oct 2023 at 9.09, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, Josef Holzmayr wrote:
>
> > Hi Robert,
>
> > It has been discussed at numerous occasions. The
Can you clarify please what LTS means here?
Alex
On Fri 13. Oct 2023 at 9.09, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, Josef Holzmayr wrote:
>
> > Hi Robert,
>
> > It has been discussed at numerous occasions. The main blocker is: we
> > need a commitment for the maintenance. So if a
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, Josef Holzmayr wrote:
> Hi Robert,
> It has been discussed at numerous occasions. The main blocker is: we
> need a commitment for the maintenance. So if a high-ranking member
> decides to push forwards with this and allocate resources, or a new
> member from the RISC-V
Hi Robert,
It has been discussed at numerous occasions. The main blocker is: we need a
commitment for the maintenance. So if a high-ranking member decides to push
forwards with this and allocate resources, or a new member from the RISC-V
ecosystem steps up to make it happen, then the project is
at some point, will there be a poky (meta-yocto-bsp) RISC-V
reference board? i'm thinking the Nezha Allwinner D1 (which is
already supported in meta-riscv) would be a safe choice. or maybe the
more powerful VisionFive 2?
thoughts?
rday
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all
