From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout4.zoneedit.com (mailout4.zoneedit.com [64.68.198.64]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.637.1588356466337373643 for ; Fri, 01 May 2020 11:07:47 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=none, err=permanent DNS error (domain: denix.org, ip: 64.68.198.64, mailfrom: denis@denix.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout4.zoneedit.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A970E40B6D for ; Fri, 1 May 2020 18:07:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout4.zoneedit.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zmo14-pco.easydns.vpn [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0qR5CefQ-idu for ; Fri, 1 May 2020 18:07:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.denix.org (pool-100-15-86-127.washdc.fios.verizon.net [100.15.86.127]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout4.zoneedit.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 98DDE409E7 for ; Fri, 1 May 2020 18:07:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.denix.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 004C3172D11; Fri, 1 May 2020 14:07:44 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 14:07:44 -0400 From: "Denys Dmytriyenko" To: meta-arm@lists.yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: [meta-arm] Couple questions about Dunfell Message-ID: <20200501180744.GZ11927@denix.org> References: <20200425225727.GL11927@denix.org> <20200501132838.GA13726@kudzu.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200501132838.GA13726@kudzu.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 09:28:39AM -0400, Jon Mason wrote: > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:31:57AM +0200, Nicolas Dechesne wrote: > > hi, > > > > On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 12:57 AM Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > > > > Hi, Jon, > > > > > > I had couple questions: > > > > > > 1. What is the time frame for branching off Dunfell? > > TL;DR: Mid-May > > We have a chicken-egg problem with the Gem5 support and Python2. > We've been doing all of our testing (until recently) on zeus. This is > because we wanted to make sure any issues we encountered were ours and > not an upstream issue. For dunfell, the current Gem5 support has a > requirement for meta-python2. To add this to our internal git repos > and test infrastructure would be painful. However, the upcoming > release for Gem5 removes such a dependency. This release is scheduled > for May 15th. So, we can either go through a bunch of work that will > be thrown away or wait a couple extra weeks. We chose the latter. > > As a stop gap, we are using the beta version of the new Gem5 release > to make sure everything is in working order and we should be able to > cut a release very quickly once it is out. > > > > 2. What is the policy for backporting to Dunfell? > > > > I am definitely interested in these questions, or rather in the answers to > > these questions! Since dunfell is LTS, I would expect a dunfell branch to > > be maintained in meta-arm. > > The dunfell branch is planned to be a stable branch. Only bug fixes, > no features. If an exception is to be made (which I really, really > don't want to do), then it would be predicated on getting the relevant > parts into the master branch of meta-arm. Thanks for the details! > > > I've got several patches in the pipeline that I'm testing and wanted to > > > know > > > my options. > > More than what you've already pushed? Yeah, few more. Mostly fixes and cleanups for toolchain and gcc. > Thanks, > Jon > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > -- > > > Denys > > > > > > > > > > >