From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dan.rpsys.net (dan.rpsys.net [93.97.175.187]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58D5C60810 for ; Wed, 22 May 2013 15:14:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r4MFITXj013815 for ; Wed, 22 May 2013 16:18:30 +0100 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at dan.rpsys.net Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id QjjN_RxbegW0 for ; Wed, 22 May 2013 16:18:29 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] (rpvlan0 [192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r4MFIOWI013805 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 22 May 2013 16:18:26 +0100 Message-ID: <1369235677.14887.13.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 16:14:37 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20130522144925.GJ32431@jama> References: <519CCFFF.2060506@windriver.com> <20130522144925.GJ32431@jama> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [OE-core] OE TSC Minutes 7 May 2013 X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Wed, 22 May 2013 15:14:53 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 16:49 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > When this was discussed about a year ago in TSC, the most important > reason was complicating backports, you can read something about it my RFC: > http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2013-April/090135.html > Now close to creating dylan branch for meta-openembedded is imho best > time to do this, not many changes from released dylan will be backported > to danny, because people will start moving to newer release instead of > backporting more and more stuff to old one (also resolving possible > whitespace merge conflict it not hard). Causing conflicts for merge was > IIRC most important reason why my proposal was rejected for oe-core. What I don't want to see is a ton of changes against OE-Core changing tabs to spaces in the shell functions. This is a particularly nasty change which breaks patch application across the flag day and breaks the way several people are using the project and code for exchange of features. Whilst there may have been minimal cases in meta-oe where the change was necessary, the situation in the core is different and there are more changes needed there since it is pretty standardised on tabs. I've been explicitly asked by various community members not to do what we did with the python change again as it was invasive and it did cause people significant pain. There is also no pressing need to change the shell situation, there was significant technical grounds for the python spacing change (for example we'd not even be considering python 3 if we hadn't fixed the tabs). I'm actually rather annoyed the TSC members agreed to one thing, then publicly backed something else thereby undermining the TSC and the agreement that was reached. There is little that I can do about this other than state my opinion :(. Rightly or wrongly, OE-Core is continuing with the style its always promoted which is spaces in python, tabs in shell. Cheers, Richard