From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [213.165.64.20] (helo=mail.gmx.net) by linuxtogo.org with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H3fnn-0006Tu-LW for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:43:39 +0100 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 07 Jan 2007 21:42:05 -0000 Received: from c-134-228-76.d.dsl.de.ignite.net (EHLO ip6-localhost) [62.134.228.76] by mail.gmx.net (mp046) with SMTP; 07 Jan 2007 22:42:05 +0100 X-Authenticated: #489940 Received: from patrick by ip6-localhost with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1H3fl5-0004xX-00; Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:40:51 +0100 From: Patrick Ohly To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org In-Reply-To: <1662139633.20070107231632@gmail.com> References: <20061230051641.GA30225@hezmatt.org> <1167506369.5626.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20061230214326.GE15188@hezmatt.org> <4596E33D.306@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <20061230235938.GC16490@hezmatt.org> <1167523571.5626.59.camel@localhost.localdomain> <459786C7.70000@dominion.kabel.utwente.nl> <1168200264.15021.54.camel@ip6-localhost> <1662139633.20070107231632@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:40:50 +0100 Message-Id: <1168206051.18289.14.camel@ip6-localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 Sender: Patrick Ohly X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Subject: Re: A question of workflow X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Jan 2007 21:43:39 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On So, 2007-01-07 at 23:16 +0200, Paul Sokolovsky wrote: > Hello Patrick, > > What do you think? Did I miss something? > > Well, why would OE core developers (err, what about non-core > developers - we also care for contributed patches - after all, to get > commit access to OE, you first contribute bunch of patches) - well, why > would they do that? Perhaps because they care enough about external contributions to make life easier for the people preparing patches? The fact that their own changes would also be tracked by monotone is probably less important. I'm aware that this is not something that can be requested from volunteers, but at least it can be suggested and perhaps someone will find it useful and (more important) doable. > Just in case, there's always another alternative - contributors > just should submit patches in the perfect form, suitable for merging w/o > tweaks. I'm not so sure that this will work - As Koen said, having to tweak a patch is the rule, not the exception. Just doing those tweaks instead of striving for perfect patches might be less work also for the core developers. > Obviously, it's just the same not attainable, nor it's really > *that* important - we want people contribute more than either us or them > to follow strict rules. Of course, these shouldn't be strict rules, but having some guidelines wouldn't hurt either. I think I have seen questions about "how to contribute patches" several times on this list already. -- Bye, Patrick Ohly -- Patrick.Ohly@gmx.de http://www.estamos.de/