Re: eCos on AT91SAM9 - call to action

> Martin Laabs wrote:
>
>> my port based on the one of Evgeniy Dushitov at the very beginning.
>> However - after some weeks I discovered that it was very hard to support
>> more CPUs out of the AT91SAM9 family with that code-base.
>> So I started from beginning, reusing only some code snipplet from
>> Evgeniy. I made the decision to split the port into three packages.
>
> [ snip ]
>
> It sounds like your input will be valuable. Please do track the
> discussion in bug 1000819 and comment where appropriate. To be clear, I
> still think it makes sense that we focus on Evgeniy's contribution and
> modify it where necessary during the review.
>
> John Dallaway
> eCos maintainer
> http://www.dallaway.org.uk/john
>

I hope that a serious look at what Martin has to offer will be
considered before deciding on which contribution is used as a base.
IMHO, simply because an existing contribution is currently being used
in the community, that should not preclude a new contribution for
replacing it, if it is in fact a 'better' contribution. I haven't seen
or worked with either code base, so I have no vested interest either
way.

-- 
Mike