Re: [ECOS] Who's maintaining CVS

[Jonathan Larmour <jifl at eCosCentric dot com>]

Koeller, T. wrote:
> Gary,
>
> as you certainly remember I wrote to you in private and asked
> whether copyright assignments should still be made to Red Hat.
> Your answer was that you were in the middle of negotiations
> with Red Hat regarding this, and I should wait a couple of
> days. Besides, nobody ever requested a copyright assignment
> for the modular AT91 HAL from me. The only response I ever got
> was from people like Tim who were working in related areas.
For the time being, please continue to assign to Red Hat. Some "official" 
maintainers are adding their own copyrights for now, but this is only a 
temporary phenomenon.

> There is a couple of contributions I have submitted that have
> not made int into CVS:
>
> - The modular AT91 HAL
> - The extended flash driver interface supportin a non-uniform
>   sector layout. I also hav a flash chip driver for the
>   AT49LV1604A that is based on this extended interface, and a
>   patch to RedBoot enabling it to use this interface.
>
> I would like to continue making contributions to ecos, but I
> really have to say that I am a bit annoyed with the current
> practice. I do of course understand that in a transitional
> phase like the one we are currently living through things tend
> to be more difficult than at other times. But community
> contributions are the one vital factor of every open source
> project, and the current practice is discouraging.
I agree completely. After a meeting today, I have been tasked with getting 
all outstanding patches in. (I believe) I have them all recorded, but it 
will take some time to get through them.

Other maintainers can also review and commit patches, but the buck stops 
with me. Hassle me :). Oh yes, you already did ;).

> I strongly support the idea of a test farm. The CVS repository
> should remain under tight control, because the quality of the
> code base is crucial to the success of ecos. Although I tested
> patches I very much dislike the idea of checking them into
> the repository without them having been reviewed by others
> independently.
Indeed that is one of the reasons for delays in patch approval. All 
patches are reviewed by hand. And indeed patches rarely get checked in 
unmodified. Due to lack of hardware availability, they are not likely to 
be tested unless the reviewer does possess the hardware.

Jifl
--
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine


--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss