Hey Sean, IMHO I'm starting to get annoyed at the number of submodules in edk2 at this point. It's getting to the point that we are in danger of needing recursive submodule clones, which are a huge

Hey Hot, Edk2 would be a good place as well. Thanks, Nate

Nate, I would actually propose you go further. In Project Mu we consume MinPlatform as its own repo. This is because it has its own lifetime and spans multiple product generations and hopefully

Why not move to edk2 repo? Thanks, Hot

Hey Laszlo, With regard to the tool refactoring, Leif had the same feedback and I completely agree with both of you. I have filed a BZ to track the tool refactoring as a separate item:

Sounds good. It is. It's just the pattern for everything else in edk2-platforms (apart from OptionRomPkg, which was just transplanted from edk2) exists in the form of <section>/$VENDOR/.

Hey Leif, Happy to hear! Yeah agreed, given that the feedback on this RFC has been pretty positive thus far, I'm planning on making a patch series for this. I'll make these changes part of said

Hi Nate, totally agree with you. Best, Chris -- *Christian Walter* *Head of Firmware Development / Cyber Security * 9elements GmbH, Kortumstraße 19-21, 44787 Bochum, Germany Email: 

Hi Nate, I agree this sounds like a good plan. The MinPlatform should be as generic as possible and suitable for all architectures. In fact it is similar to the UEFIPayload package wich is also

I am fine with a new repo. This also supports a good workflow to get a tool that then lets you pull full platforms. In theory you would only ever really need to clone a single repo manually

Hi Nate, Very positive to this on the whole. I have only been following MinPlatformPkg peripherally - at the time it was merged, I did not have the bandwidth to look into it and help make it

We have recently been evaluating the merits of MinPlatformPkg. We would welcome a MinPlatformPkg that is more accessible. GARRETT KIRKENDALL SMTS Firmware Engineer 7171 Southwest Parkway, Austin, TX

Since I've been CC'd -- the MinPlatformPkg move seems logical to me. Regarding the tools, I guess it depends on how many Intel-specific quirks they contain. I guess they could be moved too after a

That makes sense to move out MinPlatformPkg to under the vendor neutral folder if it is not Intel specific. On RISC-V, we have Platforms/RISC-V/PlatformPkg and the vendor neutral folder of RISC-V

Hi Erik, A separate manifest repository would probably be a good idea. The manifest repo is used for a lot of EdkRepo's operations so having a smaller repo dedicated repo could be beneficial from a

Hi Everyone, This has come up informally a couple of times already, but I do think that it would be beneficial to move MinPlatformPkg out of the Platform/Intel folder and into a vendor neutral

Hi Everyone, Given that EdkRepo has existed in the project for over a year now (in edk2-staging) I think it is time to get out of staging. I have considered multiple possible landing zones: 1.

That would take time to run through the process of publishing this tool (make it as public) on DMTF. I just created the reference of source code which generated by tool on my personal GitHub (not the