Hi Franck, See my comments below: Regards, Marcus
2012/11/10 Franck Jullien <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > I'm starting this discussion because I think we have a lack of > maintenance for IP cores. > > Opencores provides free hosting for projects. There is no moderator > filter applied. So we can > have very good, good, bad or empty projects. Yes, the level of each project relies on its maintainers. We are constantly removing empty project and are discussing how we can detect and present the "very good" and "good" project better. Making it easier to find the projects with "higher" quality. > When an IP is hosted at opencores, it's not easy for a contributor to > send patch for it. > The only way to get patch applied is to contact the author (am I wrong > ?). However, sometimes > cores are very old and the author is not taking care of it anymore.... The main entry of applying patches into a project is through the project maintainers. The web-forum allows attachments so it can be use to publish patches so that the community also can get access to it. And if you don't get any response from the maintainers, we can add you as a co-maintainer, of course after validating that they are not reachable. This information is stated on OpenCores FAQ. > I think we should have a special category in opencores projects where > we could have "under > control projects". Those projects would have active maintainers and > patch would be send on > the mailing list. The OCCP (OpenCores Certified Project) was introduced in order to try and get the project maintainers to make sure that their project contains a collection of information/files that is highly wanted/needed when evaluating or using the project. > IP core that have a driver in the Linux mainline should of course be > in this category. Agree, we should have an indicator which projects that have Linux driver support, or eCos (any other RTOS support). > Core in this new category should also strictly follow coding style > rules and core files organization > but that another story (we already have this > http://cdn.opencores.org/downloads/opencores_coding_guidelines.pdf). I think this is difficult, even if it would be great and would really make it easier adopting a new core. It would be as hard as to convince all to use the same text-editor or revision-system :-) > > What do you think about this ? Is it feasable at opencores ? > > Franck. > _______________________________________________ > Openrisc mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.opencores.org/listinfo/openrisc -- ______________________________________________ ORSoC FPGA, ASIC, DSP - embedded SoC design Marcus Erlandsson Direct: +46 70 824 80 33 Email: [email protected] Skype: merlandsson ______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ OpenRISC mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openrisc.net/listinfo/openrisc
