Hello from Gregg C Levine I confess I missed the original message as well. Drat! But I do agree with the sentiments expressed in the last part of the message. I'll post a copy of it here: > Speaking of which we probably should put together > some kind of conference/workshop for LinuxBIOS. So the developers can > get together and talk face to face. > That's what I agree with. Are any of you planning on attending the LWE conference & Expo in any form, next year? I'll be there, attending the exhibits. The idea is, that we should discuss more about what we are working on here. Sorry that didn�t come out right. I was transcribing my thoughts, there, and sometimes they don't work out correctly. And the usual caveats about double posts apply. If any of you don't appreciate it, please complain directly. ------------------- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."� Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linuxbios- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Preston L. Bannister > Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 2:10 PM > To: Eric W. Biederman; Ronald G Minnich > Cc: LinuxBIOS > Subject: RE: the plan for stable > > Missed the original message, but I do have a couple suggestions. > > You only know if LinuxBIOS is "stable" on a particular motherboard when one > or more people have gotten it to work on one or more revisions and instances > of that motherboard. The more cumulative experience the greater your faith. > > Perhaps the record you want is: > > Reporter (email) > LinuxBIOS version (tagged in CVS) > Motherboard version > Number of boards (especially in clusters) > Status: working/no known problems, some problems, not working > Description (optional, brief) of how used and any known problems. > > To be able to *start* with a working version of LinuxBIOS (if one existed), > and then move forward is a huge advantage. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric W. Biederman > Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 10:38 PM > > Ronald G Minnich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > A short sketch. > > > > What I want to do, but have not had time to do. For each mainboard, we > > designate an owner. The owner is responsible for letting us know that > > their mainboard works. Mainboards are in one of 3 states: (stable, > > unstable, unsupported) > > > > Mainboards start out in the unstable or unsupported state. > > > > We pick a date (1/1/03?) and say we want all owners of all mainboards to > > tell us that their mainboard is stable. We freeze the tree one month > > ahead of that time and the only changes that go in are for stabilization. > > 1 January 2003 is a bad date for me as I have plans to be far > away from computers over christmas. > > > If nobody steps up for a board, it goes to unsupported state. Boards with > > owners start out in the unstable state. > > The challenge is for a lot of boards we do not get active feedback > after a port has been completed. So for any ongoing work we need > to very very careful not to make changes to the core that break ports. > I am probably the worst offender, except for the various bits of debug > code that come and go but still. > > > Mainboards move to the stable state when the owner confirms stability. > > When patches are made for a problem, ALL stable mainboards revert to > > unstable. We iterate until we get it solid, then freeze it. > > For the first round this looks o.k, it really depends on what > kind of feedback we have. > > > This information is maintained by a file in each mainboard directory > > called STATUS, which consists of name/value paris. > > One file in the root directory called STATUS should do it.. > > > Will this work? > > Sounds like a good rough draft. The very important thing > about the stable series is that nothing happens to the core > code that could possibly break a motherboard port. That > way within a stable series we can get more but not fewer > boards working. > > Then whenever a new port gets working we can do another release. > Of course if the come in fast enough we can delay... > > > thanks (I'm off email for a bit -- at a workshop) > > Speaking of which we probably should put together > some kind of conference/workshop for LinuxBIOS. So the developers can > get together and talk face to face. > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxbios mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios _______________________________________________ Linuxbios mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
