46dcfc8 (ARM: Update mach-types) removes used machine types

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 03:36:12PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On Monday, August 22, 2011 03:32:42 PM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 03:30:41PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On Monday, August 22, 2011 03:27:19 PM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 03:16:00PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, August 22, 2011 03:01:19 PM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > > > > For further reading, see:
> > > > > > http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20110815.085325.ae6ee0
> > > > > > 7d.e n.ht ml
> > > > > 
> > > > > Russell, calm down please.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Maybe it'd be better to just email the people with broken stuff, then
> > > > > wait ... if they don't reply in a week (two weeks?) then remove their
> > > > > stuff. And make that a policy.
> > > > > 
> > > > > What do you think ?
> > > > 
> > > > Who do I email?  Which entries are causing problems?  That's the whole
> > > > bloody point.
> > > 
> > > Isn't the email in your database? You can't just script that ?
> > > 
> > > > There's just far too much of it.  The amount of effort required to sort
> > > > through this file each time it needs to be updated has become
> > > > *excessive*. The amount of effort required to go through the file and
> > > > identify which entries are broken is *excessive*.  The amount of
> > > > effort required to find who to email is *excessive*.
> > > 
> > > Why not write a script for that ?
> > 
> > No, I don't have the time at present.
> 
> You're the head maintainer here and ARM is a rising architecture. If you can't 
> cope with that, you have a growing community of very competent people here. 
> Maybe someone will be willing to take over eventually? It'll relieve some 
> pressure from you too, what do you think?

Hello.  Do you even understand the issue you're talking about?

There is a problem _right_ _now_ with the mach-types file.

That problem was caused by gplugd being merged without its entry being in
the mach-types file - which was omitted - by way of editing by hand, along
with shit loads of other entries - because of the fuckup with the
machine_is_xxx() name not matching the configuration or MACH_TYPE symbol.

So, rather than wasting a *significant* amount of time hand editing the
file at every update (which is precisely why I haven't been updating the
bloody thing) I've built it into the script so that entries which do not
conform are automatically omitted.

Problem solved.

Any remaining problems are down to the maintainers not talking to me and,
if you haven't realised yet, I have _zero_ sympathy for that especially
when it doesn't take much effort _on their part_ to do.

It's got nothing to do with ARM being a rising architecture.  It's about
maintainers doing the right thing, behaving in the right way and taking
responsibility for their fuckups.  Putting the pain where the pain should
be - in the platform maintainers lap, not in my lap.