hhhh, i forget, finally i see julius and olof in colors and moving, stil missing jonas and stefan and jeremy :)
http://videos.fscons.org/fscons/videos/FSCONS2011/about-the-openrisc-project/about-the-openrisc-project.webm 2012/2/29 BAKIRI <[email protected]> > Hi all :) > > first great job peter, we need more developer like you whatever where you > put your code :) > > yes, i think is about a year and this discussion about git and svn has > been talk and the both has right and hope to see solution sooner. > > i think it will be better get out openrisc processor from his actual > status as simple project can be found in opencores, and do like the other > processors and doing maybe his won website in opencore and include all > information about SOFT,HARD, WIKI AND ASIC > > try to divide the project in two big part, Hardware part and the software > part. the hardware part is OR1K, OR2K and it must be soon MPSOC and must be > found in opencores (SVN). > > the software part is :toolchain, linux and bootloader (maybe applications) > > it will be nice and good to separate RTL code from the software part and > try to do opencore.org is the official of the Hardware Part and > openrisc.net the official of the software part. > > finally it's my opinion and sorry if i wrote many :) nice to see you again > :) > > 2012/2/29 Marcus Erlandsson <[email protected]> > >> ** >> >-----Original Message----- >> >*From*: Jeremy Bennett >> ><[email protected]<jeremy%20bennett%20%[email protected]%3e> >> > >> >*Reply-to*: [email protected] >> >*To*: [email protected], [email protected] >> >*Subject*: Re: [Openrisc] [OpenRISC] toolchain >> >*Date*: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 08:47:42 +0000 >> > >> >> >On Wed, 2012-02-29 at 09:01 +0100, Jonas Bonn wrote: >> >> On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 18:14 +0000, Jeremy Bennett wrote: >> >> > The master repository is on SVN at openCores.org, so we should get your >> >> > code into there. To date we have mirrored specific FSF releases of each >> >> > tool, but if you are tracking mainline, we should create src-mainline >> >> > and gcc-mainline trees. The build script will then be rather simpler, >> >> > and merging upstream changes must easier. >> >> > >> >> > I'd like to propose that Pete is given SVN write access (has to be >> >> > approved through this mailing list). >> >> >> >> Given that the last five people to work on toolchain bits have all >> >> worked out of the git repositories, I'd like to propose that we ditch >> >> the SVN repository altogether. I'd even go so far as propose that >> >> Pete's repository become the master, if he's willing to take on the task >> >> of merging patches from the rest of us... that's not a lot of work given >> >> the low level of activity on this front. >> >> >> >> If somebody wants to mirror that into SVN, that's their prerogative... >> >> but I don't think we should be punishing people who do good work by >> >> forcing them to bend over backwards to push well-formed patches into the >> >> SVN cesspool. >> > >> >We have had this discussion in the past, and agreed that we would use >> >SVN where the upstream uses SVN or CVS and git where the upstream uses >> >git. >> > >> >Promoting multiple master repositories for the same tool fragments the >> >project, making it hard for anyone to adopt and should be discouraged by >> >*all* the OpenCores community. >> > >> >Don't forget that with a large user base, OpenCores generates a lot of >> >support email. After a decade of working on the project, my name is in a >> >lot of code, so a lot of that support comes as personal email to me. The >> >commonest problem is people using some out-of-date mirror of the code. >> > >> >Sticking to the one true repository solves this. That is why I have >> >proposed Pete should have SVN write access to commit his code. Since he >> >is mirroring mainline, he is familiar with SVN and CVS anyway. >> > >> >The current tool chain went through extensive testing to ensure it is >> >robust. I am delighted that someone is taking that work forward, and >> >congratulations to Pete for his contribution. >> > >> >But we need to follow our agreed engineering process, ensure the new >> >code is tested to the same standards as the old, reviewing on these >> >mailing lists. It will initially be the development version of the tool >> >chain, and then later will become the stable version. >> > >> >This way, anyone coming new to OpenCores can be confident that they will >> >find good quality software. At the same time, Pete's work will be >> >visible to the widest possible community, and in a way that ensures it >> >gets the best possible support. >> > >> >Pete - could you post the regression results for the new tool chain. If >> >you want help with any particular issues, I suggest posting them here >> >and in Bugzilla, so others can join in. >> > >> > >> >Jeremy >> >> >> I also agree with Jeremy. >> We have seen an increase of support-issues due to multiple repositories >> with >> different content, seen both in the forum/mailing-lists/IRC and in >> emails sent directly to us. >> >> As for Peter contribution.....Excellent! >> And I also think he should get SVN write access. >> >> >> /Marcus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Openrisc mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.opencores.org/listinfo/openrisc >> >> >
_______________________________________________ OpenRISC mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openrisc.net/listinfo/openrisc
