Re: README.hardware

[Joshua Lock <josh@openedhand.com>]

On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 13:35 -0600, Tom Zanussi wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-12-09 at 11:18 -0800, Gary Thomas wrote:
> > On 12/09/2010 12:08 PM, Joshua Lock wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 06:47 -0700, Gary Thomas wrote:
> > >> This file seems quite out of date, in fact it's not been updated
> > >> for 9 months :-(
> > >>
> > >> I don't know enough details to suggest a patch, but I think it
> > >> would be useful to update it to reflect "today's Poky/Yocto" world,
> > >> especially with the new visibility of the project.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I agree, although I'm also wondering if it would be better to have this
> > > information on the wiki where it can be more easily maintained by the
> > > community.
> > >
> > > Or a balance? any machine in meta/conf/machine documented in
> > > README.hardware and anything else on the wiki.
> > >
> > 
> > Wikis are great, but I tend to think of the Poky "checkout" tree
> > as self-sufficient.  It has the full manual, etc, already so forcing
> > the user to have to go to the Wiki for such information (which is
> > really only overview anyway) would not be ideal.  A combination
> > of hard files and Wiki would be OK as long as the README.hardware
> > at least mentions the "well sanctioned" ports, which right now
> > it does not.
> > 
> > I also tend to err on the side of my [sadly] many customers
> > that may have to work in non-internet-connected environments,
> > so making them have to get to a Wiki to find such answers is
> > not really acceptable.
> > 
> 
> I touched a bit on the current README.hardware in this posting, which
> suggests converting each machine into a BSP layer:
> 
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/poky/2010-December/001104.html
> 
> In that scheme, the individual sections in README.hardware would be
> moved into their own machine-specific READMEs for each BSP, keeping
> everything together.  The individual READMEs could also be made
> separately available on the 'BSP downloads' page and/or wiki for
> convenience.  Does that sound reasonable?

This sounds reasonable to me.

Cheers,
Joshua
-- 
Joshua Lock
        Intel Open Source Technology Centre