From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:14:30 +1000

On 14 June 2010 08:54, Thomas Martitz
<thomas.martitz_at_student.htw-berlin.de> wrote:
> Also, as you just said you haven't been around lately, it's hard for our
> project, considering the growing number of targets, to wait for a port
> maintainer to actually show up and do some work. If the maintainer is not
> around, then the port is effectively not maintained. It can get broken if it
> remains unmaintained.
>

I found that remark hugely rude and inappropriate. No one has ever
come up with a reason why we need to use the same compiler for all
targets, and when a port only has a few maintainers then why the hell
is anything happening to code for that target without an OK from the
people who own the device.

I am equally annoyed at the change to ACTUAL TARGET CODE WHICH WAS
UNTESTED! http://svn.rockbox.org/viewvc.cgi?view=rev;revision=26832 If
that happens in the future then send an email to the dev mailing list
(or the maintainer) or create a bug for it, NEVER commit code to
target which you personally cant test on when it is a hardware
specific change.

Jonathan
Received on 2010-06-14