Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-platforms] [RFC] Migrate devel-MinPlatform branch to master branch

["Liming Gao" <liming.gao@intel.com>]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kubacki, Michael A
>Sent: Friday, May 03, 2019 5:16 AM
>To: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>; devel@edk2.groups.io
>Cc: Gao, Liming <liming.gao@intel.com>; Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>;
>Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>; Kinney, Michael D
><michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
>Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [edk2-platforms] [RFC] Migrate devel-MinPlatform
>branch to master branch
>
>Hi Leif,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Leif Lindholm [mailto:leif.lindholm@linaro.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 8:04 AM
>> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Kubacki, Michael A
>> <michael.a.kubacki@intel.com>
>> Cc: Gao, Liming <liming.gao@intel.com>; Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>;
>> Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>; Kinney, Michael D
>> <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
>> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-platforms] [RFC] Migrate devel-
>MinPlatform
>> branch to master branch
>>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 09:11:38PM +0000, Kubacki, Michael A wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > This RFC proposes moving the content on the devel-MinPlatform branch
>> > in the edk2-platforms repository to the master branch in the
>> > edk2-platforms repository.
>> >
>> > The devel-MinPlatform branch has been used for the initial development
>> > of an EDK II based platform design referred to as "Minimum Platform".
>> > This design is intended to provide a structured approach to
>> > introducing Intel platform code into open source in a consistent manner.
>> >
>> > For more information about the EDK II Minimum Platform, please refer
>> > to the Readme.md in devel-MinPlatform.
>> > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-platforms/blob/devel-
>> MinPlatform/Rea
>> > dMe.md
>> >
>> > The following packages would be added in Platform/Intel:
>> >   * Generic packages:
>> >      * AdvancedFeaturePkg
>> >      * MinPlatformPkg
>>
>> First a generic comment with some examples:
>> Both of these include non-architecture-specific components that could be
>> useful to have more generally available.
>>
>> Certainly AdvancedFeaturePkg/Smbios/ and AcpiDebug look like something
>> of a generic nature rather than Intel-platform specific.
>>
>The intention is for advanced features to be generic and architecture
>agnostic when possible. We ultimately want to simplify the process to
>enable open source edk2 platforms and cross-architecture compatibility
>certainly aids in that goal. We're starting with the code in the Intel directory
>and we are open to moving features elsewhere based on interest and
>usefulness.
>
>I suspect we'll also evolve some elements of how these features are
>organized and designed based on feedback over time. For example, while
>we're starting with one AdvancedFeaturePkg, it may be too monolithic.
>More cohesive packages are likely easier to integrate and maintain. So
>we may propose breaking this into something like DebugFeaturePkg,
>IoFeaturePkg, PowerManagementFeaturePkg, or to some other degree. I
>expect the definition to be a fluid process based on actual demand.
>
>> And Platform/Intel/MinPlatformPkg/Library/CompressLib/CompressLib.c
>> appears to have nearly only whitespace differences compared to edk2
>> ShellPkg/Library/UefiShellDebug1CommandsLib/Compress.c.
>>
>> (With edk2 already having 3 additional quite similar files in
>> BaseTools/Source/C/Common/EfiCompress.c
>> BaseTools/Source/C/Common/TianoCompress.c
>> BaseTools/Source/C/TianoCompress/TianoCompress.c)
>>
>>
>That's a good point. In particular, it would be nice to consolidate the code
>usage
>between ShellPkg and MinPlatformPkg. Perhaps the compression code could
>be moved somewhere like MdePkg where it could be used by both packages.
>
Yes. I will submit BZ for UefiCompressLib usage. And, I will submit another BZ 
to reduce the duplication compression code in BaseTools. 

>> Secondly - edk2 has recently transitioned to bsd+patents license, and it
>> would make sense if edk2-platforms did the same. Do we want to do that
>> before or after this addition?
>>
>I will defer this to Mike Kinney.
>
>>
>> Finally, what should we do for Maintainers.txt?
>>
>I believe we need to have per-package maintainers for the packages being
>added. For
>example, merge what is in
>https://github.com/lgao4/edk2-
>platforms/blob/master/Platform/Intel/Maintainers.txt
>
>I can update the following Maintainers.txt with a proposal.
>https://github.com/lgao4/edk2-platforms/blob/master/Maintainers.txt
>
I think first step is to move the code from branch to master, then update Maintainers.txt to align to edk2 Maintainers.txt. 
 
>Regards,
>Michael
>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Leif
>>
>> >   * Board-specific packages:
>> >      * ClevoOpenBoardPkg
>> >      * KabylakeOpenBoardPkg
>> >      * PurleyOpenBoardPkg
>> >
>> > The following packages would be added in Silicon/Intel:
>> >  * KabylakeSiliconPkg
>> >  * LewisburgPkg
>> >  * PurleyRcPkg
>> >  * PurleySktPkg
>> >
>> > The following growth is expected over time:
>> >  * Platform/Intel - Additional board packages for Intel reference boards
>> >     including support for some pre-existing product releases
>> >  * AdvancedFeaturePkg - Additional modular features capable of being
>> used
>> >     in board packages
>> >  * Silicon/Intel - Additional silicon packages roughly keeping 1:1 parity
>> >     with board packages
>> >
>> > We hope the content will enable others to add new board packages and
>> > advanced features over time.
>> >
>> > The result of the change is available here for reference:
>> > https://github.com/lgao4/edk2-platforms
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Michael
>> >
>> > 
>> >