Hi, 2010/11/25 Anatolij Gustschin <ag...@denx.de>: > Hi Remy, > > On Tue, 02 Nov 2010 21:46:33 +0100 > Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> wrote: > >> Dear Remy Bohmer, >> >> In message <aanlktik0bxxfe8d5+96gy_=+cu0h_fkeyutfyo=cr...@mail.gmail.com> >> you wrote: >> > >> > As U-boot project-owner you know you have the last word in this. >> >> This is a pretty precious resource that should be used wisely, and not >> without real need. This topic is clearly in your domain, and while >> I'm trying to explain the situation to you, I will not try to >> influence your decision. > > I just wanted to ask, what is your final decision on this patch after > this discusion. Do you NACK it an we should find the real issue and > fix it accordingly? Or can you accept this patch as is?
Sorry, but I stand with my decision to NACK it. If we would allow these kind of patches, U-boot would be fluttered in no-time with all kinds of exceptions all over the place to hide bugs not really understood. What if someone else runs into the same bug in a different hardware setup and finds the real root-cause of that problem and posts a real fix. When do we know that this workaround can be removed? It would probably stay in there for years and nobody knows what to do with it... Kind regards, Remy _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
