From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ee0-f43.google.com (mail-ee0-f43.google.com [74.125.83.43]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE2A86CE97 for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 13:58:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ee0-f43.google.com with SMTP id e52so4036531eek.16 for ; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 06:58:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=snNiQpIuMGvGPFhMc84hNFAtA1qRnqFbdTtHl4Zbsm0=; b=o7OP+nPtj0OPjMZWzpYsBlHej/5hcrrBRYSMVoSM1JYlZ74M8XjTP8d4qk2PvHeUjP /KVdrrJOXl/osA13t41kq9yWgPBlqHRr6PKTX78Qkk3AC7JX18oBmSOeunDifIznmD85 Bd78nidYB3DghRzA9AVD/BjosYAr7ysjsyfAyhM3ozF8zT6JWMQxV8P02PdjoAoZSXUg fUAiDDNuNXxHd+HlpknorWOZWnlj0vSv/OpK8OFZ/vraOVMPR9K5vO6BKSmU692e04GO llJ2K8LuiAa0ZqYVigl9wy3yfXSWZR7cKHG2vEe4XANgH7z0ZrOiqkKZ2+NoR0CdjGSy sQWA== X-Received: by 10.15.100.198 with SMTP id bn46mr2570127eeb.11.1381240713120; Tue, 08 Oct 2013 06:58:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-62-24-80-145.net.upcbroadband.cz. [62.24.80.145]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id b45sm76243544eef.4.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Oct 2013 06:58:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 15:58:42 +0200 From: Martin Jansa To: Laszlo Papp Message-ID: <20131008135842.GD2872@jama> References: <20131007202336.GF18775@denix.org> <20131007203527.GG18775@denix.org> <20131008132109.GA22340@denix.org> <20131008132609.GB22340@denix.org> <20131008133918.GB2872@jama> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1? 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: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:58:34 -0000 X-Groupsio-MsgNum: 46555 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="FFoLq8A0u+X9iRU8" Content-Disposition: inline --FFoLq8A0u+X9iRU8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:50:59PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote: > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Martin Jansa wro= te: >=20 > > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:30:05PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko > > wrote: > > > > Since Dora is a branch of meta-qt5, I don't understand your stateme= nts > > > > about > > > > being orthogonal and not integrated... > > > > > > > > > > You will be able to use *any* meta-qt5 on top of Dora, just as you can > > use > > > meta-qt5 on top of denzil nowadays. The "dora branching" sounds like = red > > > herring to me. The dependencies in Dora will be good enough for 1-2 > > years, > > > if not much more. > > > > That's not true, we were just lucky that there weren't any incompatible > > changes in oe-core, but as soon as 1.6. brings e.g. new cmake, master > > branch will work only with master and dora only with dora (because of > > .bbappend). > > >=20 > I am not sure who it is not true. Qt has been working for me, and even if > there are small quirks, they community can and will provide changes. Even > if they could not, they can use .bbappend, and custom changes for any > recipes. That is the strength of open embedded after all. It is very > unlikely that everyone will always like every package. That's basically what I said, if they use unsupported combination, they can expect that they will maybe need to resolve some quirks on their own. > So the same branch names are the only supported combination, if you want >=20 > > to use meta-qt5/master with oe-core/dylan then you're on your own. It > > works now, but only because we're lucky. > > >=20 > IMO, this is unreasonable. It will cause additional overhead and looking = at > the manpower behind this layer, I am not really sure it is worth it. > Quality should be over quantity. Maintaining several branches rather than > just having one and well-qualified branch for starter would be more > fruitful in my opinion. Everything goes to master first, bugfixes can go also to release branches which track older oe-core releases, the same rules which apply to meta-oe and other layers apply here. > > > 5.2 comes with several fundamental improvements. I would not personal= ly > > > recommend Qt 5.1 to anyone in about two months time when the release = can > > > happen. :) > > > > There are companies still using 5.0.0 just because they fear to upgrade > > or because newer qt versions were released to late for their release > > cycle of real hw products. I agree that it would be nice for everybody > > to just use latest, but there are still meta-qt5 users which cannot do > > that. > > >=20 > So what? They can always use bbappend, own packages, old branches, etc. > That should be in no way obstacle for new innovation. Yes, that's why meta-qt5 will exist in "old branch" for each oe-core release and such branches will get only bug fixes, because people who cannot upgrade oe-core to latest probably don't want to upgrade qt5 to latest as well. --=20 Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com --FFoLq8A0u+X9iRU8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlJUD5IACgkQN1Ujt2V2gBxoTACfUJHxT2FuQBrxOfaUZQN/yPF+ QJsAnjfn7UJ4960oeIMaGbcIkwG0I7xR =Q3Ji -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --FFoLq8A0u+X9iRU8--