From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B829EE00283 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2012 11:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Jul 2012 11:33:00 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,351,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="172784487" Received: from vorpal.jf.intel.com (HELO [10.7.198.168]) ([10.7.198.168]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Jul 2012 11:33:00 -0700 Message-ID: <1342456456.4156.2.camel@vorpal> From: Joshua Lock To: McClintock Matthew-B29882 Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:34:16 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <50042C06.70900@linux.intel.com> <50043429.4070204@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: edison/denzil patches (post-1.1.2 and 1.2.1) X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:33:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 16:01 +0000, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote: > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Joshua Lock wrote: > > On 16/07/12 08:10, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Joshua Lock wrote: > >>> > >>> On 12/07/12 10:43, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Josh, Scott: > >>>> > >>>> I've pushed a set of patches for edison/denzil branch - and I may push > >>>> a few more still to: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=mattsm/edison > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=mattsm/denzil > >>>> > >>>> These are all cherry-pick's and most applied cleanly and a few had > >>>> some minor cleanups. Please consider these for after the point > >>>> releases. I will continue to push to these branches and rebase these > >>>> branches off the official upstream trees as well. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I don't know how much work will be done on Edison after the 1.1.2 > >>> release. I > >>> personally will no longer be working on it and I don't think the team > >>> here > >>> as enough resources to maintain it perpetually. > >> > >> > >> OK. > >> > >>> I assume that these changes are predominantly to further improve PPC > >>> support? > >> > >> > >> Yes. > >> > >>> In general your branch has several types of changes that have generally > >>> been > >>> considered inappropriate for a point release (such as recipe upgrades, > >>> new > >>> functionality, etc). > >> > >> > >> I see very little of this, the valgrind series and/or the a few other > >> image generation bits. > > > > > > Indeed, that's likely the sum of it but the changes in isolation don't offer > > any context as to why they're required for PPC so my gut reaction is to > > reject them as they violate the suggested guidelines for stable releases. > > I'm fine to have some of them rejected, such is how things work ;) > > >>> Personally I'm not very keen on the idea of pushing them all and > >>> advocating > >>> their inclusion. I'd strongly encourage adoption of this release series > >>> if > >>> it's to continue to be relevant to your work. > >> > >> > >> So is poky edison dead now? How do I support folks that still want to > >> use it? I understand that *you* may not have time but is there a > >> process for someone that cares about this release still to do work? If > >> a fork is required is there a way to point folks at this fork? Such as > >> if you want this to work use this other version? > > > > > > I certainly can't see why one would need to fork. > > > > I would like to see Edison live on, which is why I sent an email suggesting > > it be adopted, *I* just don't have time to work on it any more. > > I know what you mean ;) > > > I'm sure Saul and/or David can help work out a process, as I don't have a > > clear understanding of it (I am but one cog in the engine). I can't imagine > > why it would be hugely different from the way it's been maintained thus far. > > > > Much of that work you've already been doing with the branch you have > > submitted. > > Yep, I've made my best effort to only backport commits already upstream. > > > In addition there are a different set of requirements for just getting > > changes into the branch vs. having some kind of release which includes those > > changes. > > > > The latter would require QA, build/release engineering, release readiness, > > etc. > > I understand. I'm fine with adding stuff to the edison branch for now > and we can worry about another official release sometime in the future > (or never). I'm mostly wanting a place I can tell people to get the > (working) code from for our targets. And ideally it's on > yoctoproject.org and not github.com or git.fsl.com Great, the best thing would be to submit a pull request against the edison branch with a suitable subject. > > Just for some more context, we just release our SDK off of edison and > I expect plenty of activity around bugfixes and back porting commits. > I would like this work to be available to all attempting to build > edison as well. Congratulations! I appreciate your effort in sharing this work. Joshua