From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp3-g21.free.fr (smtp3-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.3]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 061D9E0071F for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 05:21:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e6520eb (unknown [88.170.243.169]) (Authenticated sender: eukrea) by smtp3-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09941A619A; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 14:21:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 14:21:42 +0200 From: Eric =?UTF-8?B?QsOpbmFyZA==?= To: Otavio Salvador Message-ID: <20130718142142.192bc4b0@e6520eb> In-Reply-To: References: <999FEFBC61661A4099B55CE06B5D10755377FC@039-SN1MPN1-001.039d.mgd.msft.net> <1714287.19idnEh5B1@rudolf> <999FEFBC61661A4099B55CE06B5D107553783F@039-SN1MPN1-001.039d.mgd.msft.net> <20130717101347.537b91c2@e6520eb> <20130717142654.107d37c3@e6520eb> <20130717143302.7fc2415b@e6520eb> <20130717150116.6e1d70af@e6520eb> <51E701DD.3040905@freescale.com> <20130718091638.54c29d11@e6520eb> Organization: =?UTF-8?B?RXVrcsOpYQ==?= Electromatique X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.2 (GTK+ 2.24.19; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: "meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: GPU 2d/3d acceleration not working in yocto qte-in-use-image X-BeenThere: meta-freescale@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Usage and development list for the meta-fsl-* layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 12:21:55 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Le Thu, 18 Jul 2013 09:18:22 -0300, Otavio Salvador a =C3=A9crit : > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 4:16 AM, Eric B=C3=A9nard wrote: > > Le Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:02:27 -0300, > > Otavio Salvador a =C3=A9crit : > > > >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Daiane Angolini > >> wrote: > >> > On 07/17/2013 10:14 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > > >> >> Yes and if you check those they're build failure fixes (except the > >> >> duplicated assignment in mx28evk) so I could keep autobuilder and > >> >> users being able to build. So this is the exception :-) > >> > > >> > I don't agree it should exists any exception for this. > >> > >> For everything there're an exception. However those patches were > >> failures which NO ONE fixed and I use daily build for checking the > >> quality of the BSP so it being broken is a problem for me. > >> > >> It is clear that *most* people do not run updated master branches (or > >> they'd have got those failures and send a patch). > >> > > some peoples are not only trying to get a successful build on a daily > > basis but are designing products (sometimes based on master when the > > product's release is due for the next Yocto's release) and so can't > > update the master branch every day when they are working on their > > board's BSP. > > Being aware patches are applied on master to improve it (or fix it when > > necessary) is a good information for them. >=20 > I agree and I also have products being done. >=20 > Another thing it seems it would be bad if you update to today's master > and it is broken, no? So I think I end helping your product > development. >=20 > >> > I really think any merged patch MUST be sent to ML previously. > >> > >> Most are send. Except the exceptions as said above. > >> > >> > I've been "accepting" your master-next approach only because I don't= think > >> > it matter for anyone. However, we must be sure what have in master. > >> > >> There's GIT for it. If people matter GIT log have all the information > >> and I try to keep informative logs. > >> > > You're right, we always can find a technical solution. A more community > > friendly solution would be to use the mailing list as done in most > > other layers/projects but that's your layer so that's your policy and > > now we know it. There is not cost for you (only a git send-email before > > doing the git push - or even just after if you prefer). >=20 > This is to make your life easier. As I said the patches pushed > directly were to fix build-failures or critical issues. >=20 > Now with this on mind I am curious ... do you review all patches I > send? In case you do I am doing a good job as you comment very rarely > on them ;) >=20 > It is very good when someone review my patches and find a issue I > missed so, in case you're not following the mailing list close, please > do. >=20 You are right don't change anything, that's perfect. Best regards Eric