Hi, On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> wrote: > Hi Simon, > >> OK, messaged received loud and clear. It does require a change of >> process at my end - now I have to find relationships between commits >> in different series going to different maintainers and try to tie them >> together. Just one more thing to worry about. > > Consider a 'paradigm shift' here: instead of building series according > to intended custodians, one builds them according to functional > relationship. If a series needs one custodian more than the others, > he'll take it and ask for the others' ack. If there's a tie, this can be > resolved between custodians. If one foresees a tie, then one can > proactively suggest a resolution. > >> But I understand your concern that, in fact, if there is no user >> immediately forthcoming, then it will just sit there and no one will >> notice if it is dead code. >> >> BTW, is there any easy way to obtain build-coverage information for >> U-Boot? In other words, can we easily find code that is not enabled by >> any existing board? That might be an interesting investigation. > > Seconded -- with the added note that we need coverage across all > architectures.
This patch is needed by new exynos memory init code. I am copying Hatim so that he is aware that it will need to be sent as part of his memory init series, which I believe is coming soon. We can leave this for now. Regards, Simon > >> Regards, >> Simon > > Amicalement, > -- > Albert. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot