Dear Jean-Christophe,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagn...@jcrosoft.com>
> ---
> Makefile | 14 +++++++-------
> board/{omap3 => ti}/beagle/Makefile | 0
> board/{omap3 => ti}/beagle/beagle.c | 0
> board/{omap3 => ti}/beagle/beagle.h | 0
> board/{omap3 => ti}/beagle/config.mk | 0
> board/{omap3 => ti}/evm/Makefile | 0
> board/{omap3 => ti}/evm/config.mk | 0
> board/{omap3 => ti}/evm/evm.c | 0
> board/{omap3 => ti}/evm/evm.h | 0
> board/{ => ti}/omap1510inn/Makefile | 0
...
Regarding all three patches:
First, as already discussed, I don't like this and feel fine with
board/omap3. So a formal NACK from me, knowing that it most probably
will be overridden by some others ;)
Second, where do you know from that all these boards are from TI? Are
you sure that they are not from SpectrumDigital, Mistral or DigiKey etc?
Third, I don't like the mixing of board and vendor name as directory
names. It seems to me that where you think you know the vendor, you
use the vendor name, and where you seem to not know it, you use the
board name. So, to be consistent, and to overcome vendor name issue
above, I'd like to use the board name everywhere. That is:
board/beagle/
board/omap3evm/
board/omap1510inn/
...
board/omap5912osk/
...
board/omap2420h4/
...
board/zoom1/
board/zoom2/
board/overo/
board/pandora/
...
To improve this even more, something like this would be nice:
board/omap3beagle/
board/omap3evm/
board/omap1innovator/
...
board/omap1osk/
...
board/omap2h4/
...
board/omap3zoom1/
board/omap3zoom2/
board/omap3overo/
board/omap3pandora/
...
Best regards
Dirk
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
