[ofw] RE: Removing MFT tools from svn

[Fab Tillier]

Why not have the maintainers do their job and actually maintain the code?  This goes for OpenSM and the FW tools, probably other bits in the tree too.

Fwupdate I think is obsolete.  I don't know about the others.

-Fab

From: Reuven Amitai [mailto:reuven at mellanox.co.il]
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:42 AM
To: Fab Tillier; ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
Subject: RE: Removing MFT tools from svn

Please see inline ..

________________________________
From: Fab Tillier [mailto:ftillier at windows.microsoft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 8:25 PM
To: Reuven Amitai; ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
Subject: RE: Removing MFT tools from svn
Will the FW package on the Mellanox downloads page work and be supported with any binaries built from the WinOF SVN source?  Is Mellanox stepping up to support this, and release new versions whenever a change to the drivers is checked into SVN would break a previous version?
[Reuven]  The new FW package doesn't work directly with IBAL. It's independent which has the benefit in case of inability to install WinOF from any reason.

I'm very weary of having the WinOF SVN become (or rather having already become) a second class repository where members periodically dump large amounts of code to bring it up to date with their own internal tree.  I wish people would treat the WinOF SVN more as the primary source repository for Windows.  Community members don't have visibility in the various vendor's internal trees to see the detailed change history, and that information is lost when large patches are merged in to bring things up to date.
[Reuven] First, you are right that it's more desirable that WinOF svn will be the primary repository. We are in the middle of movement toward achieving that goal.
nevertheless, there is still difficulties to work with it (just one to mention: lag for every simple command). Tools directories synchronized less often. (OFED MFT tools are one major version ahead).
Is it preferred to leave it like that ? delete stale directories (which ones except fwupdate)? or live with outdated tools sources (I don't know how often they will updated)


-Fab

From: ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Reuven Amitai
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:51 AM
To: Fab Tillier; ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
Subject: [ofw] RE: Removing MFT tools from svn

My intentions were naive. I suggest to remove these tools because I wonder who uses these tools directly.
There is different package (for Mellanox HCAs) that dedicated for fw tasks which is up to date. Why not use it ?
I understand that OFED insist that the code will be part from the distribution.
Is there need just to maintain and update the code here only for review ?
Are there tools that no one use and can be removed (fwupdate, anything else ?)

Reuven.

________________________________
From: Fab Tillier [mailto:ftillier at windows.microsoft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 7:05 PM
To: Reuven Amitai; ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
Subject: RE: Removing MFT tools from svn
Ask yourself this: are you planning on removing the FW update utility from OFED and let it be provided by vendors only?  If not, why would you treat the Windows release differently?

FW update functionality should be part of WinOF.  Not everyone uses vendor releases. There are some stale directories, for sure - fwupdate is one - and those should be deleted.  The rest should be kept current.

-Fab

From: ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org [mailto:ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Reuven Amitai
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 5:16 AM
To: ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
Subject: [ofw] Removing MFT tools from svn

Hi,

I suggest that the following directories will be removed from svn repository :
fwupdate, flint, mread, mwrite, mst, spark (all located under trunk\tools).
These tools aren't part of WinOF release and should be supplied by the HCA vendor.
Moreover, the tools aren't updated (1.0.1.2676 version while 2.1.0.4337 at OFED - Linux. I got the versions from other svn)

What do you think about it?

Thanks, Reuven.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/ofw/attachments/20080430/fe4af3f8/attachment.html>