On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 8:28 PM, Merlin Büge <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 14 Jun 2018 09:45:49 +0300 > Kyösti Mälkki <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> I hear you and weigh your opinion according to the number of commits I >> can recognize you have authored on the repo. > > I just want to mention: > Generally, helping out with documentation and (especially) code review > and even ordinary users who report bugs are also a value-add to the > coreboot project. >
Agreed and Talidan should not get offended by previous comment. I get way more rude and personal in some of my reviews towards commercial vendors. Apologies for that. Just recently, cases of RELOCATABLE_RAMSTAGE=n started to fail to boot certain payload builds. The accumulated developers time it took to bisect, discuss and come up with a sub-standard solution for that; should I say 8 hours across 5 active developers. That time is better spent elsewhere, I consider the discussion of why we deprecate older boards from master just not productive at all. Notice that even the little details Matthias provided earlier already moves us forwards. The criteria I listed was my personal wishlist as flipping to RELOCATABLE_RAMSTAGE=y has proven to be quite easy and the remaining platforms are: northbridge/amd/amdfam10 northbridge/amd/lx <- waiting for EARLY_CBMEM_INIT northbridge/intel/i440bx <- already tested northbridge/via/vx900 <- I know competent person to do this soc/intel/fsp_baytrail <- I have hardware and know person to double-check soc/intel/fsp_broadwell_de <- I know competent person to do this Kyösti
-- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
