On 19/02/2014 10:37, Ithamar R. Adema wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Oliver Tappe <zooey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote: > >> I'm not saying the following is a good compromise, but it is my POV: >> With Ithamar, the person who has put most effort into the ARM port has >> already stated that he's just fine with doing his work externally, and the >> PPC port doesn't actually have a maintainer. As a result, I'm all for >> moving everything but x86-based ports to github or any other external >> playground. >> > > +1, and additionally, I think the line for a "usable" port should be on > wether or not it can start a piece of userland, even if it is just bash. > This would indicate a pretty complete kernel and user land setup, while it > being able to "bootstrap" pretty much only says the cross compiler can > build and there are enough stubs to make it all link ;) Again I'm fine with working in a branch, that's what I did with the Sam port already, although merging several times back to master when it seemed some parts were ready, and making sure other platforms kept working. I just don't want to have to revert file deletion commits around. François.