On 05/04/2016 10:22 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Thomas B. Rücker email@example.com wrote:
I had set up a website watcher a while ago, so that I wouldn't miss any new developments, especially as I was interested in compliance reports becoming available. This change came up about a week ago and as I haven't seen official mentions anywhere, I thought I'd mention it here myself.
I, explicitly, do not offer any interpretation or speculation as to the reasons for that change. This is left to LINARO to clarify, if they choose to do so.
Dude. I let you know about this in a private email when I saw that the website was incorrect because I knew it was something you cared about.
"Dude", as you didn't reply to my private question, I didn't want to bring up a private conversation on a public list. I have respect for private conversations and won't quote or use information from such if I don't have a public source for the same. I did have the website monitoring set up for long before and it let me know about this independently, so that's what I felt comfortable referencing. As I said, I believe that it's sensible to mention it here, as I and others referenced this before here and discussed it. The status of this was unclear and there was confusion. I personally feel this change clarifies the point of Linaro.
I however did not feel comfortable at all to qualify and comment this change in *any* way to avoid anyone being possibly offended by me doing so.
I'm not going to issue a press release for correcting an error on the website.
I certainly didn't expect one and this should have been clear from my private email.
Given how much hostility a _very_ _carefully_ written email seems to evoke, I think I'll completely stop posting here. I don't feel welcome.
For me this is EOD. Have a nice remaining life everyone and thanks for all the fish.
changed: 96borads compliance page (http://www.96boards.org/compliance/)
--- @ Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:23:21 +0000 +++ @ Tue, 26 Apr 2016 13:06:51 +0000 @@ -152,11 +152,12 @@ o Bluetooth and WiFi firmware Note that Linux kernel modules must not be provided as binary firmware blobs. The GPLv2 licence prohibits this.
- At least one open source bootloader shall be provided for the
executes immediately after the internal SoC startup code. The
this bootloader should be available from a publicly accessible
integrated into the bootloader trees on https://github.com/96boards
+*** Bootloader ***
- It is strongly recommended one open source bootloader to be
the board that executes immediately after the internal SoC
The source for this bootloader should be available from a publicly
accessible site or integrated into the bootloader trees onhttps://
- Fastboot protocol support shall be provided for all Consumer Edition boards
- It is strongly recommended that vendors of an ARMv8 board provide
Thomas B. Rücker