> I will create a repo for the qc stuff (let's discuss the details offline)
Okay, cool, thank you. Repo is created and I uploaded a patch to hook
it up to the build system here: https://review.coreboot.org/42548
> It may be good to get the various blob owners on board with such a license so
>
Am Mi., 17. Juni 2020 um 02:47 Uhr schrieb Julius Werner <
jwer...@chromium.org>:
> Patrick, any further concerns from your side? If not, would you mind
> creating a new repository for this? I can write the patches to move
> blobs and adjust the Makefiles afterwards.
>
I will create a repo for
> Here is what I suggested somewhere on Gerrit [1]:
>
> I was thinking we could move the current `3rdparty/blobs`
> to something like `3rdparty/limited_blobs` or `3rdparty/
> restrictive_blobs`. And guard it like the `amd_blobs`.
> Then move anything without doubts about redistribution
>
Hi Julius,
many thanks for bringing this up on the mailing list.
On 11.06.20 02:05, Julius Werner wrote:
Would it be enough to just create a second repository
(3rdparty/restrictive_blobs or something like that) which is not
automatically checked out by CONFIG_USE_BLOBS so people
Hi!
I also consider using branches within the same repository to separate
different binaries to be a very bad idea. What if you need some blob
from one branch and another form another branch for the same board?
Also not having a branch checkout out doesn't imply not having
downloaded the
-Original Message-
From: Julius Werner [mailto:jwer...@chromium.org]
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2020 2:05 AM
To: Patrick Georgi
Cc: Julius Werner ; Coreboot ;
Nico Huber ; Angel Pons ; Stefan Reinauer
; Ryan Case ; Wim Vervoorn
; Frans Hendriks ; Martin Roth
Subject: Re: Supporting
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:11 AM Wim Vervoorn wrote:
> You only need a single mainboard to be in the tree. A mainboard can trigger
> cloning a specific branch of this repository after warning for the license.
So I think you're basically just suggesting to use branches instead of
different
Am Mi., 10. Juni 2020 um 03:43 Uhr schrieb Julius Werner <
jwer...@chromium.org>:
> > Clearly, the rules should be the same for all blobs, so if
> > some blobs with language like this are already in the repository, it
> > shouldn't be grounds to reject new blobs from landing.
It's not unheard of
I think creating a separate repository e.g. for the fbg1701 would be a bad
idea.
Would separating the mainboard blobs from the others be an idea.
You only need a single mainboard to be in the tree. A mainboard can trigger
cloning a specific branch of this repository after warning for the
[resend to mailing list with approved address]
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Julius Werner wrote:
>
> Trying to generalize the discussion from
> https://review.coreboot.org/c/blobs/+/41379 here.
>
> Some of the blobs in our 3rdparty/blobs repository have license
> language that basically says
10 matches
Mail list logo
