Hi, Andrew and John,
On May 19, 2010, at 0:02 , Andrew Martens wrote:
It may be time to copy our libraries to an mlib_devel_11_1 revision
and continue from there. ROACH2 uses Virtex6 and the 10.x and
earlier tools do not support it. Disadvantages are that a lot of
library maintainers will be working in mlib_devel_11_1 and bug
fixes, changes etc may not make it back into mlib_devel_10_1. It
worked reasonably well with the move from mlib_devel_7_1 to
mlib_devel_10_1 though so it probably wouldn't be a problem.
I think this would be a good idea. This is the first time (AFAIK)
that the chips CASPER supports include some that are mutually
exclusive in terms of tool versions (i.e. no system generator v2pro
support after 10.1, no v6 support before 11.1).
On May 19, 2010, at 9:22 , John Ford wrote:
IMO, there has to be a conscious effort to maintain tools for each
generation of hardware, at least to some point. I think that since
10.1
is the last version to support the Virtex-II Pro, it should be kept
up to
date and usable, at least for some time to come.
I agree that ongoing support for the v2pro is very important! IMHO,
this means the 10.1 CASPER libraries should maintained going forward
by back-porting relevant bug fixes, but (IMHO) it does not
necessarily mean that every new gizmo added to the 11.1 (and future)
CASPER libraries should be back-ported to the 10.1 CASPER libraries.
Likewise, bug fixes in the 10.1 libraries should be forward-ported to
the 11.1 (and future) CASPER libraries, but some changes may not be
relevant to the newer libraries. I think this will end up with
diverging libraries, but I suspect that the 10.1 libraries are fairly
stable now and won't change too much, especially as the 10.1 user
base inevitably shrinks over time.
Does that sound reasonable? Can anyone think of an alternative
approach that would do better at keeping existing "legacy" users
happy while not impeding future development?
Thanks,
Dave
