On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Marco Martin notmart@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday 16 December 2013, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
... put [deliberately] like that, it's not really a choice... :)
i realise however that you need something to work with in the short-term. you are free to do that, but if you want to submit an "upstream" fex file, you are free to call it whatever you wish as long as it does not have the words "eoma" or "eoma68" in it. i trust that this is clear.
ok..
right now i'm packaging an eoma68 fex as part of a clone repository (so not upstreamed yet)
if you were helping to develop the base eoma68 fex file pending conversion to a base device-tree: yes.
is this ok?
now that you mention it - i hadn't thought about this before that's why! - really, no, it isn't, because people may become confused and think that the fex file was authoritative, and it isn't.
or i can do a different separated package with it with a different name
probably a better idea, now that it's come up :)
l.