[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 1/1] ramips: remove RB750GR3 support

[Thibaut]

> Le 21 juil. 2018 à 10:17, John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> a écrit :
> 
> 
> 
> On 21/07/18 09:44, Thibaut wrote:
>>> Le 21 juil. 2018 à 09:24, John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> a écrit :
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 19/07/18 20:08, Thibaut wrote:
>>>>> On 19 Jul 2018, at 19:52, Mathias Kresin <dev at kresin.me> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2018-07-19 19:26 GMT+02:00 Thibaut VARÈNE <hacks at slashdirt.org>:
>>>>>> faf94d926e2810f895f2a98d4a49ee2fe8f673e8 added "support" for a hacked
>>>>>> device where the original boot loader (routerboot) has been replaced
>>>>>> by u-boot.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Support for this device with stock bootloader is possible (as evidenced
>>>>>> by support for the RBM33G), and conflicts with this code.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Remove code before release.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thibaut VARÈNE <hacks at slashdirt.org>
>>>>> FYI, I already NAK'ed the very same patch on github.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I do agree that it can be done better by not requiring the replacement
>>>>> of the bootloader. Nevertheless, support for this board is already
>>>>> shipped since LEDE-17.01 and I don't agree to drop support for a board
>>>>> without providing an alternative/fixed/better image.
>>>> Just to clarify: this is not “support”. This is a user created custom hack that applies only to their modified board.
>>>> 
>>>> T.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> openwrt-devel mailing list
>>>> openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
>>>> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
>>> Hi,
>>> I agree that proper support for none modified boards is far better and I am always for having such support in tree. what i am failing to understand here is why it is so important to remove this support or none-support patch from the tree ? in general our stance was that if there is at least one user we'll try to carry the functionality as long as we can. So why not remove this when a better replacement is in place ?
>> Because there will be no replacement and I certainly don’t want to confuse the end users into thinking there will be one.
>> 
>> I don’t know yet another way to say this more clearly: this patch doesn’t “drop support”: support was _never there_. There will be no “replacement”: there is no upgrade path.
>> 
>> What this patch does is dropping bad code. What there will be is proper, correct NEW support for the hardware this code /pretends/ to offer support for but doesn’t.
>> 
>> At the end of the day the device covered by this code is a /different/ device than the one support will be provided for. It’s A Frankendevice, that by the way doesn’t even pass the “hardware available?” question. The installation instructions on the wiki do not even provision a way to revert the hack.
>> 
>> On a side note, if it’s a policy to support every user hack and bastardized hardware for which there is only one user _in tree_, then we have a fundamental difference in opinion and I’m afraid openwrt is then inflicting on itself a maintenance nightmare it can’t afford.
>> 
>> My 2c,
>> T
> well, that certainly killed the discussion ....

Trying hard to explain my reasoning kills the discussion? I’m frankly baffled.


_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel