Hi all, I'm also fine with having this in the flashrom repository. As I understand it, you are just playing around currently. As long as this is not hooked up to the build system during this phase (to avoid problems), I don't see a problem here.
Though, when the plans and ideas get more concrete, then it might make sense to use a separate repository for it. But let's see where this goes :) // Felix On Sat, 2022-07-30 at 19:24 +0000, Thomas Heijligen wrote: > Hi Evan, Greg, > sorry for my late response. > > I'm fine with having language bindings in the flashrom repository. > Especially when a user of those bindings lives also in the > repository. > But then we have to find a way to make building everything convenient > for developers and distributers. > The other solution would be to create new repositories in gerrit for > the bindings and the user of it. This would imply that we fix our api > versioning first. > > Imo the separate repositories in combination with some gerrit bots > might be the best solution to make everyone happy. But I'll support > you, Evan, on the solution you will choose. > > -- Thomas > > On 20 July 2022 01:28:34 CEST, Evan Benn <evanb...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 at 03:46, Greg Troxel <g...@lexort.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Evan Benn <evanb...@chromium.org> writes: > > > > > > > I think the first question is is the flashrom community happy > > > > to have > > > > these bindings live inside the flashrom git repo? They could > > > > live in > > > > their own separate repos, but keeping them with flashrom will > > > > make > > > > keeping up with libflashrom API changes more straightforward. > > > > > > > > > > I am more or less an outsider, but as a packager: > > > > > > I do not want the binding to be hooked into the main build > > > system. > > > > > > Building flashrom is one thing, and I expect that to work > > > pretty much > > > everywhere. > > > > > > > > > > Good point, I will make sure the bindings are not part of the build > > system. > > > > > Building the rust bindings I expect to be not wanted by > > > everyone who > > > wants flashrom, to have heavier dependencies (rustc is > > > beastly), and > > > to have signficant portability problems. That's all fine, but > > > if in > > > the same release tarball there should be a way to cd to some > > > subdir, > > > and build, expecting that flashrom is already installed and > > > using the > > > installed headers and libs, and expecting a rust compiler. > > > > > > I don't care at all about upstream repo organization if the > > > rust > > > binding is its own release tarball. > > > > > > > I agree, the bindings do not need to go in the flashrom tarball. > > > > > > > > I'll observe that changes to libflashrom and changes to the > > > bindings > > > may not be connected. > > > > > > Given all of the above, I think it's better to have each > > > language > > > binding be a separate repo with separate release tarballs. > > > > > > > I see it is possible to exclude files from the archive using > > .gitattributes, > > but that does not make it easy to publish a libflashrom-rust- > > bindings > > archive separately. > > > > Does anyone know the process or contact for creating a new archive > > on > > review.coreboot.org? > > > > Thanksflashrom mailing list -- flashrom@flashrom.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to flashrom-le...@flashrom.org > _______________________________________________ > flashrom mailing list -- flashrom@flashrom.org > To unsubscribe send an email to flashrom-le...@flashrom.org _______________________________________________ flashrom mailing list -- flashrom@flashrom.org To unsubscribe send an email to flashrom-le...@flashrom.org
