In message [off-list ref] you wrote:
There's also a third option, which _encourages_ people to port their
platform without necessarily making it easier: just let arch/ppc break.
Please don't. This is supposed to be a "stable" kernel tree.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de
Monday is an awful way to spend one seventh of your life.
On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 12:01 +0100, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
In message [off-list ref] you wrote:
quoted
There's also a third option, which _encourages_ people to port their
platform without necessarily making it easier: just let arch/ppc break.
Please don't. This is supposed to be a "stable" kernel tree.
I wouldn't advocate doing it just yet, but I don't think anyone really
expects to see arch/ppc continue until Linus announces 2.7.0. Setting a
cut-off of 2.6.17 or so, or perhaps a point in time when we officially
stop caring about it, would seem a sensible approach.
Neither did I suggest actively breaking it or removing it -- if you feel
strongly about keeping it then I'm sure Paul would accept your patches
to make it keep working, even after others have stopped bothering.
But I think the time and effort required to maintain arch/ppc in
perpetuity should be weighed up against that of just porting the
embedded platforms to arch/powerpc.
It's your choice, of course, but I personally don't think I'll be
submitting many more patches which take arch/ppc into account -- this
one was an exception because it was me who broke it, and it is still a
_little_ too early to be letting it break, IMO.
--
dwmw2