<div dir="ltr">On 18 September 2017 at 16:46, Otavio Salvador <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br" target="_blank">otavio.salvador@ossystems.com.br</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><span class=""><div>What is the policy on doing u-boot version upgrades this late in the<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="m_-422887529407011750quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
release cycle? SHouldn't this wait until after the release?<br></blockquote></div></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div></span><div dir="auto">Why?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It is just another recipe and we are upgrading to the final release.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">As Martin said, it was already broken. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I'll take the responsibility to fix it. But as other packages, upgrades has risk and we have more than enough time to proper fix it.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Why? Because it was merged to master after the freeze.</div><div><br></div><div>Personally I'm of the opinion that u-boot is one of those special recipes that if an upgrade appears just after freeze, we consider it. If we don't keep it up to date BSPs won't use the recipe, and we'll be back to every BSP layer containing its own special copy of the u-boot recipe.</div><div><br></div><div>Ross </div></div></div></div>