From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::143; helo=mail-it1-x143.google.com; envelope-from=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-it1-x143.google.com (mail-it1-x143.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14B17211CA2DF for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 06:25:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it1-x143.google.com with SMTP id r6so125969itk.0 for ; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 06:25:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=17sxr36lfMc7uiAluU/keXnb6oKhDt4KVHuPypwz4iM=; b=S6A69oP6oLeb/caBoLYHJUKpLbx3gmFDkKhyDdqXZMM+23nFwAVv6W19mwavUm+PbQ RBJIQ2sqbwqkI39LqbT8h4aOpiK+2AqmJSedTPlTkNKU2UO6L9+BW0z+uTkMFELSGGAW m7ID4Um7wFBies2JoIYA+5oQ552QGSefe8hG5Sp8EV83TeaCS/5bFkdC5LkCbCoiQdDs KzROocabFh1PyKmBrYFhAfbk5ZygLnRMEtvm3lv0xE69qCvrpeIUCa4EcBZHv4DK+iEF LC/60ieRvNYgFhQyWchWTCleD/58efIopJwUzPVkdKvTbZepI3hinK2e+OjOlOYL5UcN A6Kg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=17sxr36lfMc7uiAluU/keXnb6oKhDt4KVHuPypwz4iM=; b=CqrvXsodvl4M5j96dxgHaKj4GvDNNY4rseMwYzv0ezR3TCtjvEYEa7KRuPHVAZcxxj SaUMT+hzTbysR2sBwgp2MQsSLFchS+xYiCZhHjpSsB/chYJT2i6bRBk6RaMlDfES9DWT i891pXuhAmcadmRi6fywWP9lPbwvDGX3ZSNWv5JQp6AbeH1L/EoIUaSHzYMNt+POaUIu V9UIWoJNSCQ4xT/XWR7OLm7oS9Aw/zyMOaF9KVzklIkJhQrmU8lWYInXRiHPiuVUUhf1 uKSijZg4RC3VJmHI06kh5doXtfJK2jaMRvgXxi/du3tat2n2bO1mZWMG5/VrKpBAx70C msZw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuaVXcm/ChAsuEuvzmdzfl45mxNznsz4zZMRAA6uVHmK1fRdwTrR 8eB2/WfQTc9D/0LWE/5NH79EXy6KTlhQSr7Qxxkogw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IYO9QJux3ygyWzdc1mjph0C6Y3GjGDelnHSdZzl5C5sYCKinJrsJevs3KOjfDf/BqjFeZHumWu7qwtbrkjfdWo= X-Received: by 2002:a02:15da:: with SMTP id 87mr1756429jaq.2.1549549524765; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 06:25:24 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190205162537.6472-1-pete@akeo.ie> <20190205162537.6472-19-pete@akeo.ie> <75f9055c-8a83-c75d-4a49-044d8f5052bc@akeo.ie> <0f36167e-1637-2ebb-ed6e-c82b97df07c9@akeo.ie> In-Reply-To: <0f36167e-1637-2ebb-ed6e-c82b97df07c9@akeo.ie> From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 15:25:12 +0100 Message-ID: To: Pete Batard Cc: "Kinney, Michael D" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , "leif.lindholm@linaro.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 edk2-platforms 18/22] Platform/RaspberryPi/RPi3 *NON-OSI*: Add ATF binaries X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2019 14:25:26 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 12:35, Pete Batard wrote: > > On 2019.02.07 02:35, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > > Hi Pete, > > > > When I saw it as a single patch series, I did assume all the > > patches were for the edk2-platforms repo. And it looked like > > non-OSI binaries were going into the edk2-platforms repo. > > > > Patch #0 did not make this clear either that multiple repos > > were targeted. > > > > I have not seen a patch series with content for multiple repos. > > Well, new ways of doing things have to be introduced sometimes and, to > make things a lot more convenient for people who submit work (and > others), I would pressure the edk2 mailing list to accept this kind of > multiple edk2-platforms + edk2-non-osi patchset submission *for new > platforms*, where content that is aimed at non-osi is simply tagged > *NON-OSI* rather than split into 2 separate patchsets. As a global > timesaver (since it also makes review of a newly introduced platform > easier IMO, by not risking people to miss the separately submitted > non-osi content), it does make a lot of sense to me to do it this way, > rather than enforce a rigid approach. > > It also makes life simpler for people who simply want to test (rather > than review), as they can just apply the full patchset onto their local > edk2-platforms repo in one breadth, rather than have to hunt and apply > from 2 different sets. To me, the advantages of doing things in this > fashion largely outweigh any potential drawback. > > > It would be clearer if there were 2 different series. One for > > edk2-platforms repo and one for the edk2-non-osi repo. > > I'm not planning to resubmit a new patchset just to split between osi > and non-osi at this stage. > > If I hear a lot of backlash, and there is need for a v6, I may split it, > but I really think this approach of submitting brand new content to > non-osi, by simply tagging it *NON-OSI* on the subject line, should be > deemed as an acceptable way to introduce the non-osi content for a new > platforms. > The subject is [PATCH v5 edk2-platforms 18/22] Platform/RaspberryPi/RPi3 *NON-OSI*: Add ATF binaries so it does seem like you are proposing non-osi content to go into edk2-platforms. Patches for edk2-non-osi are usually described as [PATCH vN edk2-non-osi #/#] ... Your current arrangement also results in a need for me to go and edit the commit log by hand when I apply the patch, since the part in [] is stripped by git am, but the rest remains. Since all changes go to the same list, I don't think it is necessary to mandate that patches that target different repositories are split into different series, and I take your point about being to apply patches, and having the ability to easily figure it which parts belong together. So in case there turns out to be a need for a v6, please update the subjects, but otherwise, we can work with what has been posted to the list. Thanks, Ard.