> Hi Marek, > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Marek Vasut <marek.va...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Wolfgang, > >> > >> I notice you've finally gotten sick of 'talking to the wall' regarding > >> unmaintained code (net, USB, AVR32, etc.) > >> > >> To make life a little easier for everyone, maybe we can put together a > >> list of U-Boot sub-components which do not have an active maintainer so > >> we can discuss what to do about it as a whole rather than in a > >> piecemeal fashion > > > > And this'll produce more talk to the wall. > > Sorry, should have been more specific - List all the code that does not > have a maintainer in one thread and set a timeframe on deprication of the > lot unless maintainers are found (say 3 months) and then just depricate it > all in one go... > > > I'll take over the USB, so you better CC me for USB patches. We need > > someone for NET now ... > > I still wonder if we can't just move all the unmaintained code off to a > corner like /depricated with a CONFIG_SYS_ENABLE_DEPRICATED with a big fat > warning that there is no support for depricated code? Anything that stays > in depricated for longer than 6 months can them be thrown away. Make a > rule that no board configuration which sets CONFIG_SYS_ENABLE_DEPRICATED > will be accepted into mainline - If you really want feature 'X' for your > board and simply cannot live without it, be prepared to maintain it :) > > Like Wolfgang, I would like to see these sub-systems that are prone to > bit-rot removed, but I think we should be able to come to a comprimise and > 'box' the bit-rot (kind of an inverse to the Linux 'staging' strategy which > prevents non-compliant code getting into the main kernel code base)
Or find some maintainers ... M > > Regards, > > Graeme _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot