============= start of quoted message ================ On Tuesday, November 19, 2013 2:42 PM, Ezequiel García wrote: > I'd like to know what ever happened to the "Boot U-Boot from UBI > volume" proposal, > as it seemed a very interesting project. > > Currently I'm working in a product with a _very_ long-life, yet based > in NAND flash, > and so I would have considered the ability to have the bootloader in a > bad block aware > device very appealing. > > ... and in the same vein, I would really appreciate to have some > status information about each > proposed project. Something that tells us if it was rejected (and > maybe some useful reasons > for rejection as feedback?) and/or accepted. > > On the other side, maybe this is too much to ask? ;-)
Sorry for the slow response. I had hoped to be able to announce the results of the voting actually during the week of ELC Europe (back in October). However, there were some delays and the final vote hasn't yet completed. We usually do a pretty poor job of announcing the results of our evaluation. This time is no different. While I can't announce yet which projects were selected (because the CE workgroup voting is not finalized yet), I can at least shed a little light on a few that are out of the running. This will not be comprehensive, because I don't have time today to talk about all the proposals. But in general, the UBIFS proposals were not rated highly by the Architecture Group. The main reason for this was that a lot of companies (at least companies with a vote in the CE WG Architecture Group) appear to be moving away from using raw NAND. Hence, UBIFS is less strategic to develop for in the long run. Note that this only reflects the interests of "consumer electronics" requirements, and (maybe) not the trends in the general embedded Linux industry in general. Of the UBIFS-related proposals, only the robustness testing/fixes proposal is still being considered for sponsorship. When the voting is complete, which should be by the end of the month, I'll try to find some time to provide more detail about individual proposals and why they were accepted or rejected. -- Tim _______________________________________________ Celinux-dev mailing list Celinux-dev@lists.celinuxforum.org https://lists.celinuxforum.org/mailman/listinfo/celinux-dev
