From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 209.132.183.28, mailfrom: lersek@redhat.com) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by groups.io with SMTP; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 13:19:52 -0700 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D638309BF1A; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 20:19:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-116-63.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.63]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A38C345D3; Fri, 16 Aug 2019 20:19:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 1/1] MdePkg: Add STATIC_ASSERT macro From: "Laszlo Ersek" To: "vit9696@protonmail.com" Cc: "devel@edk2.groups.io" , "leif.lindholm@linaro.org" , "afish@apple.com" References: <20190813081644.53963-1-vit9696@protonmail.com> <20190813081644.53963-2-vit9696@protonmail.com> <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E4D0EC7@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <65C2153C-7D59-490C-8DD2-A48FF0EEA8DE@protonmail.com> <74D8A39837DF1E4DA445A8C0B3885C503F75D776@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E4D1378@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <8e766773-0b4e-e9bd-31a2-a858c7b476c9@redhat.com> Message-ID: <2ceb3185-dbdd-d490-121d-ab20a304780c@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 22:19:49 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8e766773-0b4e-e9bd-31a2-a858c7b476c9@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.45]); Fri, 16 Aug 2019 20:19:51 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 08/16/19 21:38, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > I understand that edk2 is a "kit", and quite explicitly caters to > out-of-tree platforms. That's not a positive trait of edk2 however; > it's a negative one, in my judgement. To clarify... I didn't mean that edk2 should willfully ignore dependent platforms. Harmony between universal edk2 code and dependent platforms is important. I meant that more platform code should live inside the edk2 project. Again, this is a personal opinion. Laszlo