Hi Nico, I don't have any opposition to reorganizing the repo to have one flat master branch with all the platforms in different folders.
- ApolloLakeFspBinPkg - BayTrailFspBinPkg - BraswellFspBinPkg - BroadwellFspBinPkg - KabylakeFspBinPkg - SkylakeFspBinPkg - etc. That way you would only need 1 submodule. Would that work better for the coreboot community? I'll poll the Tianocore community, and other people at Intel as well to see if anyone else has inputs. Thanks, Nate -----Original Message----- From: Nico Huber [mailto:nic...@gmx.de] Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 9:39 AM To: Desimone, Nathaniel L <nathaniel.l.desim...@intel.com>; Patrick Georgi <pgeo...@google.com> Cc: coreboot <coreboot@coreboot.org> Subject: Re: [coreboot] Kaby Lake FSP Hi, On 11.07.2018 18:18, Desimone, Nathaniel L wrote: > However, there is nothing in the license that prevents you from > providing links to github.com/IntelFsp. It might not be exactly what > you were hoping for but would adding a git submodule in coreboot blobs > that points to github.com/IntelFsp suffice? Alternatively, I suspect > it is feasible to setup the repo tool to pull github.com/IntelFsp at > the same time it pulls the coreboot repo. I had adding the Github repo as submodule in mind too as a fallback. One downside is its structure, though, i.e. one branch per platform. This means we'll have to maintain n submodule pointers for a single repo :-/ Nico -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
