Re: [RFC] policy about nonworking recipes

[Philip Balister <philip@balister.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1294 bytes --]

Rolf Leggewie wrote:
> Koen,
> 
> we're still discussing to find a good solution.  No need to get all 
> worked up yet and calling other people pendantic[sic].  Is it really too 
> much to ask that the data in OE should generally be such that "bitbake 
> $target" at least builds?

Rolf,

Rather than focus your efforts to improve OE by clearly defining what 
builds and what does not, how about trying to identify a problem felt by 
a large number of developers?

For me (and I hope others), the number one problem is keeping a set of 
"useful" images building on Angstrom (you could expand this to include 
other distros). In my mind, having console-image, and some images that 
support UI's (for machine used with screens etc) would be really 
helpful. Beyond this, actually making sure the images work on the target 
hardware would be awesome.

It seems like identifying a set of common machines, distros, and hw and 
making sure we can consistently provide working images would increase 
the developer base of OE. In turn, this would lead to more people able 
to improve the complete set of meta-data. We really need to recruit more 
developers, and the way to do that (I believe) is have more simple stuff 
just work and work well.

Good night all,

Philip

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3303 bytes --]