Re: release branch for meta-ti?

[Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>]

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:13:48PM +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
> 
> Op 19 mrt. 2012, om 22:05 heeft Tom Rini het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 05:02:47PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 01:58:54PM -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 01:58:36PM +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>> 
> >>>> Any volunteers for maintaining a releasebranch that matches the upcoming oe-core release in ~4 weeks?
> >>> 
> >>> If Denys or Chase don't step-up, I'll do it.  As qualification, I do
> >>> such a thing for oe-classic currently :)  But if either of them would
> >>> rather, I'll defer to them.
> >> 
> >> We'll probably need to set meta-oe-maintenance up anyway for meta-arago to 
> >> work with, rather than chasing changes in the master...
> > 
> > Yes, meta-oe will also need a maintenance release to match,
> 
> Working on that already :) That should hopefully avoid the usual arago forks 
> or everything and the kitchensink.

Something's wrong with the above statement... :)

Is it "meta-oe maintenance should hopefully avoid the usual arago forks...", 
which is kind of backwards and doesn't make much sense to me :)

Or is it "meta-oe maintenance should help avoid the usual arago forks...", 
which I hope is what you wanted to say... :)

BTW, it's not like we like forks or encourage people to fork, but that's how 
people are used to work. I'm having hard time convincing people otherwise - 
i.e. track mainline or a stable branch and submit your changes back as 
patches. Chase is the only one who took this advise to heart and it's been 
pleasure to work with him supporting AM-SDK since then! :)

-- 
Denys