On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 06:29:14AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: [...] > > Again, this board *isn't* Nyan, so it should pretend that it is. > > It is a derivative design of the nyan reference platform, and it is > compatible with it. It is perfectly fine to claim to be compatible > with it. I'm sorry, but you're just wrong here. I guess that depends a little on how you define compatibility. I had always assumed that the top-level compatible string would be a sort of "checksum" over the rest of the content. Which, admittedly, makes it kind of redundant. Compatibility could mean a lot of things. Does it mean any kernel/DTB compatible with one device could run on any device derived from it? Does compatibility mean it needs to provide full functionality or is it still compatible if it runs at a reduced feature set but doesn't "break" otherwise? Thierry
Attachment:
pgpvjnKAXw6Xf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
