From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 995EAC02182 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 21:11:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout4.zoneedit.com (mailout4.zoneedit.com [64.68.198.64]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.22413.1737666711444356359 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 13:11:52 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=none (message not signed); spf=pass (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 B0C9840C86; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 21:11:50 +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 jVQCaytRSpwD; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 21:11:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.denix.org (pool-100-15-87-159.washdc.fios.verizon.net [100.15.87.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout4.zoneedit.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6FEAB40ACD; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 21:11:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.denix.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D58D816418F; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 16:11:45 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 16:11:45 -0500 From: Denys Dmytriyenko To: Randolph Sapp Cc: afd@ti.com, reatmon@ti.com, c-shilwant@ti.com, meta-arago@lists.yoctoproject.org Subject: Re: [meta-arago][master][PATCH] meta-arago: break dependency on meta-arago-demos Message-ID: <20250123211145.GY21836@denix.org> References: <20250116192950.3391293-2-rs@ti.com> <20250120211347.GK21836@denix.org> <20250121191714.GO21836@denix.org> <20250122225154.GT21836@denix.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 21:11:53 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-arago/message/15748 On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 05:12:23PM -0600, Randolph Sapp wrote: > On Wed Jan 22, 2025 at 4:51 PM CST, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 02:33:12PM -0600, Randolph Sapp wrote: > > > On Tue Jan 21, 2025 at 1:17 PM CST, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 12:54:39PM -0600, Andrew Davis via lists.= yoctoproject.org wrote: > > > > > On 1/21/25 9:16 AM, Ryan Eatmon via lists.yoctoproject.org wrot= e: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >On 1/20/2025 3:13 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > > > > >>On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 01:29:51PM -0600, Randolph Sapp via l= ists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > > > > > >>>From: Randolph Sapp > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>Remove any explicit dependencies on meta-arago-demos. These = were the > > > > > >>>last of the "demos" in this layer and they were only being b= uilt for > > > > > >>>legacy devices. Demos should primarily be in layers above th= is unless > > > > > >>>they are used for functionality testing. > > > > > >> > > > > > >>Why not move those pieces to meta-arago-demos then? > > > > > >> > > > > > >>E.g. move the packagegroups there and add bbappends for the d= efault image and > > > > > >>world recipes, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > >Basically make meta-arago-demos an island unto itself.=A0 If y= ou include it,=20 > > > > > >then you get it, if you don't then no harm.=A0 Make sense. > > > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > Will we test with and without this layer? If not then we will e= nd up breaking > > > > > things and missing dependencies between layers. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Seems like a lot of maintenence for a layer with just a couple = demos. Demos > > > > > that should probably all go up into focus SDK layers anyway. > > > > > > > > Should meta-arago-demos be deprecated and removed in its entirety= then? Or=20 > > > > does it only apply to a few select that are still in meta-arago-d= istro? > > >=20 > > > Yeah, current plan is to drop this layer entirely, just wanted to d= o it in a > > > sane order. I put a note of that in the tear-off section. Still wai= ting on these > > > patches to be merged before continuing though. Still got a few more= patches for > > > reworking Qt dependencies and enabling Qt6. > > > > I would like to request better commit messages for both of these patc= hes -=20 > > this one and the one Andrew linked for the config change. >=20 > Noted. >=20 > > I do appreciate the difficulty with cross-dependency of thses changes= - first=20 > > you update meta-arago-distro to not depend on meta-arago-demos, then = you need=20 > > to remove meta-arago-demos references from the layer setup configs, a= nd only=20 > > then you can finally remove meta-arago-demos layer itself, if that's = the plan. >=20 > Funny thing about that, meta-arago-demos was created without properly c= reating a > dependency in the meta-arago-distro to track it. Ah, yeah, that was my oversight - I take full responsibility fot that. At= the=20 time we were cleaning meta-arago-extras and all the demos were extracted = from=20 that layer, but I totally missed updating meta-arago-distro: https://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-arago/commit/?id=3Dff0d17778adbccda2d97= b206976b45fe199c970e > > But the first 2 patches do not paint a bigger picture, specifically n= ot=20 > > explaining the actual reason behind these very invasive changes. >=20 > This was discussed in the Webex Yocto channel and 2 other email threads= . I could > have sent out a message on the mailing list but it would have arrived 5= minutes > before this patch because I was already testing things back in December= . >=20 > > I do know about the Qt6 plans and you briefly mention it here later i= n the=20 > > discussion. But for anyone outside the internal discussions it is not= clear=20 > > what is going on and why. Moreover, is the plan to have any Qt6 demos= and=20 > > re-use the meta-arago-demos layer? Or is the plan to not have any dem= os and=20 > > relegate that to downstream SDK layers, if nedded? > > > > Thanks. >=20 > The plan is to not have any demos that are not strictly used for testin= g in this > repo. Downstream SDK layers will be reworking their existing demos for = Qt6, > picking these up if they are applicable (but nobody seemed to care abou= t these > demos in particular). >=20 > The Qt6 stuff is somewhat new. First week of December was when a decisi= on was > made and an email was sent out shortly after announcing that. I seem to= have > incorrectly assumed you guys were in the loop, my bad. I believe there was a slight misunderstanding here. I do have some intern= al=20 insight, but what I was looking for and asking for here, is to have a com= mit=20 message that would clearly explain for any outsider what are the high lev= el=20 plans for these changes and why they are being made. A concise version of= the=20 above 2 paragraphs w/o referring to any internal communications... :) Both of the patches mostly say "breaking the dependency", which is a bit = odd=20 reason for completely removing the entire layer and all the demos. --=20 Denys