{RFC] console-image.bb

{RFC] console-image.bb

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

Today I bumped into console-image and noticed the following:

IMAGE_INSTALL = "task-base \
            ${ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL} \
            ${SPLASH} \
            ${ZZAPSPLASH} \

Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
This under the assumption that console-image is a distro independent recipe.

Or, in case this is an angstrom specific recipe shouldn't it be better
named angstrom-console-image ?

your views are appreciated :-)

Frans

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Rolf Leggewie]

Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?

This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
back then and I think it makes sense now.

I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/1/30 Rolf Leggewie <no2spam@nospam.arcornews.de>:
> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
>
> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
> back then and I think it makes sense now.
>
> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
>
Actually mistyped tye filename, it was console-base-image.bb
and in the beginning it says that it is an angstrom bootstrap image,
so having angstrom specific env vars in it makes sense, but guess the
name then should be angstrom-console-base-image.bb, just like other
images are prefixed with openmoko, nylon, opie, slugos and whatever

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Michael 'Mickey' Lauer]

Am Samstag, den 30.01.2010, 11:53 +0100 schrieb Frans Meulenbroeks:
> 2010/1/30 Rolf Leggewie <no2spam@nospam.arcornews.de>:
> > Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> >> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
> >> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
> >
> > This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
> > back then and I think it makes sense now.
> >
> > I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
> > found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
> >
> Actually mistyped tye filename, it was console-base-image.bb
> and in the beginning it says that it is an angstrom bootstrap image,
> so having angstrom specific env vars in it makes sense, but guess the
> name then should be angstrom-console-base-image.bb, just like other
> images are prefixed with openmoko, nylon, opie, slugos and whatever

Well, it used to be an angstrom recipe, but (as with many other angstrom
recipes...) it is very useful for other distros as well, so it has bgeen
renamed some time ago. 

A natural consequence of it being so versatile would be to change the
ANGSTROM_ vars to DISTRO_, so that would get my vote.

Cheers,

-- 
:M:

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Philip Balister]

On 01/30/2010 05:47 AM, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
>
> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
> back then and I think it makes sense now.
>
> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?

I also like IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL. Distro's shouldn't be customizing 
images using this variable :)

The problem with this var is it means one persons console-image is not 
equal to anothers, but I am fine with this. I regularly use this 
variable to insert extra packages into an image for testing purposes.

Philip

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 30-01-10 11:35, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> Today I bumped into console-image and noticed the following:
> 
> IMAGE_INSTALL = "task-base \
>             ${ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL} \
>             ${SPLASH} \
>             ${ZZAPSPLASH} \
> 
> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
> This under the assumption that console-image is a distro independent recipe.
> 
> Or, in case this is an angstrom specific recipe shouldn't it be better
> named angstrom-console-image ?
> 
> your views are appreciated :-)

I vote for leaving it as it is, it gives some credit to where it
originated from. The image name already has been forcefully renamed to
strip out 'angstrom' so lets keep at least this bit of heritage.
Besides, who's going to fix all users of ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL?

regards,

Koen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFLZE7ZMkyGM64RGpERAjNMAJ4i4uyZeQFuJ+HDtqa8dbMXXxsWWQCfY0p8
3IiVq82EW/8VVA3bWWjraxg=
=R852
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Paul Menzel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1271 bytes --]

Am Samstag, den 30.01.2010, 16:23 +0100 schrieb Koen Kooi:
> On 30-01-10 11:35, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> > Today I bumped into console-image and noticed the following:
> > 
> > IMAGE_INSTALL = "task-base \
> >             ${ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL} \
> >             ${SPLASH} \
> >             ${ZZAPSPLASH} \
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
> > DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
> > This under the assumption that console-image is a distro independent
> recipe.
> > 
> > Or, in case this is an angstrom specific recipe shouldn't it be
> better
> > named angstrom-console-image ?
> > 
> > your views are appreciated :-)
> 
> I vote for leaving it as it is, it gives some credit to where it
> originated from. The image name already has been forcefully renamed to
> strip out 'angstrom' so lets keep at least this bit of heritage.

I think the VCS (Git) is a good tool to find out where something like
this originated from.

> Besides, who's going to fix all users of ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL? 

Good question. I think `sed` should be good enough for this. Otherwise
someone has to decide if it is better to confuse new users or to put
some work on old users to update the variable name.


Thanks,

Paul

[-- Attachment #2: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 30-01-10 16:37, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 30.01.2010, 16:23 +0100 schrieb Koen Kooi:
>> On 30-01-10 11:35, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>> Today I bumped into console-image and noticed the following:
>>>
>>> IMAGE_INSTALL = "task-base \
>>>             ${ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL} \
>>>             ${SPLASH} \
>>>             ${ZZAPSPLASH} \
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
>>> This under the assumption that console-image is a distro independent
>> recipe.
>>>
>>> Or, in case this is an angstrom specific recipe shouldn't it be
>> better
>>> named angstrom-console-image ?
>>>
>>> your views are appreciated :-)
>>
>> I vote for leaving it as it is, it gives some credit to where it
>> originated from. The image name already has been forcefully renamed to
>> strip out 'angstrom' so lets keep at least this bit of heritage.
> 
> I think the VCS (Git) is a good tool to find out where something like
> this originated from.

It isn't when people copy stuff to overlays, or just blindly copy it
into other files.

The angstrom core developers already have a betting pool on how long it
takes for kaelios and minimal to copy newly committed changes from
angstrom to their distro configs without credit.

regards,

Koen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFLZF/YMkyGM64RGpERAm3kAJ942+gMJVOCoprsQ0/4Yp2pC20TSACfQD3j
cEgUrBGvdmzm5ZoWIzZf1EU=
=kYQ/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Michael 'Mickey' Lauer]

Am Samstag, den 30.01.2010, 17:35 +0100 schrieb Koen Kooi:
> >> I vote for leaving it as it is, it gives some credit to where it
> >> originated from. The image name already has been forcefully renamed to
> >> strip out 'angstrom' so lets keep at least this bit of heritage.
> > 
> > I think the VCS (Git) is a good tool to find out where something like
> > this originated from.
> 
> It isn't when people copy stuff to overlays, or just blindly copy it
> into other files.
> 
> The angstrom core developers already have a betting pool on how long it
> takes for kaelios and minimal to copy newly committed changes from
> angstrom to their distro configs without credit.

At least for the minimal distro you can say that, but it's not true. I
won't bother now to get you the commit messages and the actual content
in the files (sane-foo.inc), but it's pretty obvious that I gave mucho
kudos to Angstrom when I synced minimal with it.

-- 
:M:

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 30-01-10 11:47, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
> 
> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
> back then and I think it makes sense now.
> 
> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?

of all the ways to solve it, you just had to go out of your way to annoy
people.

A simple IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL += ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL would have done
the job, but no, lets create more work for people, break existing docs
and especially ignore what the maintainer of the recipes said.

Way to go
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFLfDN7MkyGM64RGpERAk0eAKCxLVowYlE4h9ls/kmdCcbj4uZesACfZxa0
VPWpTNi7tN+GxEfF/BYBf5Q=
=0Idf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Rolf Leggewie]

Koen Kooi wrote:
> of all the ways to solve it, you just had to go out of your way to annoy
> people.

I thought that was your specialty.  Everybody agreed on this, except
you, for IMHO very incomprehensible reasons.

Now, people are going out of their way to please you little princess,
address your silly concerns and you're still not satisfied.

First, you complain about the image not having the angstrom- prefix
anymore.  Now, when that's reinstated you complain again and revert a
meaningful patch back to before its broken state.  Maybe it's time to
check your mental state?

I hope OE can soon find a way to finally end your dictatorship ways.  OE
has been held hostage to you and Angstrom for far too long.

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 30-01-10 11:47, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
>> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
>>
>> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
>> back then and I think it makes sense now.
>>
>> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
>> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
>
> of all the ways to solve it, you just had to go out of your way to annoy
> people.

I BEG YOUR PARDON

I did not make the change, actually I have not even seen it. I think
you owe me an apology for this.
I also would like to get the opinion of the TSC on the above accusation.
>
> A simple IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL += ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL would have done
> the job, but no, lets create more work for people, break existing docs
> and especially ignore what the maintainer of the recipes said.
>
> Way to go

FYI: I popped a question three weeks ago.
Today Rolf asked me about the status in #oe.
As you can see above 4 people (Rolf, Mickey, Phil and me were in
favour of the proposal. In irc mckoan also backed the proposal.
There was one person opposed to it: you.
Rolf asked whether he could make the change. As I was about to leave I
agreed that he made the change.

If you want it to be an angstrom recipe, please name it as such (or,
even better: start your own angstrom tree or branch).
If it is a common recipe, I am equally entitled to change it as you
change the mythtv recipes or the eee701.conf file.

Frans.


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
>
> iD8DBQFLfDN7MkyGM64RGpERAk0eAKCxLVowYlE4h9ls/kmdCcbj4uZesACfZxa0
> VPWpTNi7tN+GxEfF/BYBf5Q=
> =0Idf
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 17-02-10 19:58, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
> On 30-01-10 11:47, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
>>>> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>>>>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
>>>>
>>>> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
>>>> back then and I think it makes sense now.
>>>>
>>>> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
>>>> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
> 
> of all the ways to solve it, you just had to go out of your way to annoy
> people.
> 
>> I BEG YOUR PARDON
> 
>> I did not make the change, actually I have not even seen it. I think
>> you owe me an apology for this.
>> I also would like to get the opinion of the TSC on the above accusation.

Please pay attention, I responded to rolfs mail, not yours

> 
> A simple IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL += ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL would have done
> the job, but no, lets create more work for people, break existing docs
> and especially ignore what the maintainer of the recipes said.
> 
> Way to go
> 
>> FYI: I popped a question three weeks ago.
>> Today Rolf asked me about the status in #oe.
>> As you can see above 4 people (Rolf, Mickey, Phil and me were in
>> favour of the proposal. In irc mckoan also backed the proposal.
>> There was one person opposed to it: you.

And funnily enough I'm the maintainer, so I get the final say.

>> Rolf asked whether he could make the change. As I was about to leave I
>> agreed that he made the change.

IRC isn't worth anything when it comes to decision making.

>> If you want it to be an angstrom recipe, please name it as such (or,
>> even better: start your own angstrom tree or branch).

There are multiple things wrong with the commit:

1) it silently changes the outcome of 'bitbake console-image' if you
have ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL set

2) It doesn't mention in the commit message that 1) happens

3) It invalidates docs without any hint

4) It wasn't discussed on the mailinglist, but on a medium where I'm not
present

5) the maintainer of the recipe wasn't informed of the change

With this change it seems angstrom developers have to update docs, deal
with user complaints, update sample config files, etc, etc, just because
Rolf jumped the gun. I find that unacceptable.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD4DBQFLfD+MMkyGM64RGpERAsHcAJ0TvgFEzIULXdGV3vTl1MdduSDDugCY3VgD
Ut2LwB0i1AH9GMz7YedxjA==
=F5i2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Philip Balister]

On 02/17/2010 10:33 AM, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
> Koen Kooi wrote:
>> of all the ways to solve it, you just had to go out of your way to annoy
>> people.
>
> I thought that was your specialty.  Everybody agreed on this, except
> you, for IMHO very incomprehensible reasons.
>
> Now, people are going out of their way to please you little princess,
> address your silly concerns and you're still not satisfied.
>
> First, you complain about the image not having the angstrom- prefix
> anymore.  Now, when that's reinstated you complain again and revert a
> meaningful patch back to before its broken state.  Maybe it's time to
> check your mental state?
>
> I hope OE can soon find a way to finally end your dictatorship ways.  OE
> has been held hostage to you and Angstrom for far too long.

Slow down guys, you are spinning out of control. The problem is not so 
much the change, just the silent method in which it was accomplished.

The basic problem here is that console-image is used by a variety of 
people. We do not like the name of the var for adding extra packages, 
but we use it anyway.

If this change was not reverted, I had the potential of losing lots of 
build time because of a silent change. Right now, I am working at a 
customer site and am not closely following the irc channel, so the only 
way I have of keeping up with things is on the mailing list.

Rolf, yes, this change has been flogged to death over the years, but you 
need to be more careful when making changes that impact a large 
audience. If in doubt send a patch to the list.

Personally, I would be happier just adding back the Angstrom var so 
peoples stuff didn't break and nag them to change it before removing the 
Angstrom var. But the I tend to take non-confrontational approach to 
solving problems. And this sets me up for constantly fixing other 
peoples bad commits.

Philip

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 17-02-10 19:58, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
>> On 30-01-10 11:47, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
>>>>> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>>>>>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
>>>>>
>>>>> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
>>>>> back then and I think it makes sense now.
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
>>>>> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
>>
>> of all the ways to solve it, you just had to go out of your way to annoy
>> people.
>>
>>> I BEG YOUR PARDON
>>
>>> I did not make the change, actually I have not even seen it. I think
>>> you owe me an apology for this.
>>> I also would like to get the opinion of the TSC on the above accusation.
>
> Please pay attention, I responded to rolfs mail, not yours

You are quoting only from my email and have edited all of Rolfs' text
away, so although technically you might be responding to his email, by
keeping only my text you create the impression that the reaction is
towards me.
>
>>
>> A simple IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL += ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL would have done
>> the job, but no, lets create more work for people, break existing docs
>> and especially ignore what the maintainer of the recipes said.
>>
>> Way to go
>>
>>> FYI: I popped a question three weeks ago.
>>> Today Rolf asked me about the status in #oe.
>>> As you can see above 4 people (Rolf, Mickey, Phil and me were in
>>> favour of the proposal. In irc mckoan also backed the proposal.
>>> There was one person opposed to it: you.
>
> And funnily enough I'm the maintainer, so I get the final say.

Is it? This is, as far as I know, not the way we cooperate within OE.
And, funnily enough, I have not seen such prudence or reluctance by
you when it comes to changing other peoples recipes.

BTW just checked the MAINTAINERS file and it does not list you as
maintainer of that recipe either. FWIW

>
>>> Rolf asked whether he could make the change. As I was about to leave I
>>> agreed that he made the change.
>
> IRC isn't worth anything when it comes to decision making.

It is the place where the developers gather.
But the decision taking was not done on irc. As I already explained
before there was a proposal with 4 reactions on it on the mailing
list. So total 5 opinions. 4 were in favour, 1 was against.

>
>>> If you want it to be an angstrom recipe, please name it as such (or,
>>> even better: start your own angstrom tree or branch).
>
> There are multiple things wrong with the commit:
>
> 1) it silently changes the outcome of 'bitbake console-image' if you
> have ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL set
>
> 2) It doesn't mention in the commit message that 1) happens
>
> 3) It invalidates docs without any hint
>
> 4) It wasn't discussed on the mailinglist, but on a medium where I'm not
> present
>
> 5) the maintainer of the recipe wasn't informed of the change
>
> With this change it seems angstrom developers have to update docs, deal
> with user complaints, update sample config files, etc, etc, just because
> Rolf jumped the gun. I find that unacceptable.

I haven't reviewed the change yet, so I cannot comment on 1 or 2.
As far as 3 concerns: yeah, changes often invalidate docs. Btw they
are not OE docs.
As far as 4 concerns: I think the change has been discussed in this very thread.
and wrt 5 I already explained my position above.

Frans.
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
>
> iD4DBQFLfD+MMkyGM64RGpERAsHcAJ0TvgFEzIULXdGV3vTl1MdduSDDugCY3VgD
> Ut2LwB0i1AH9GMz7YedxjA==
> =F5i2
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 17-02-10 20:40, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
> On 17-02-10 19:58, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
>>>> On 30-01-10 11:47, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
>>>>>>> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>>>>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>>>>>>>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
>>>>>>> back then and I think it makes sense now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
>>>>>>> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
>>>>
>>>> of all the ways to solve it, you just had to go out of your way to annoy
>>>> people.
>>>>
>>>>> I BEG YOUR PARDON
>>>>
>>>>> I did not make the change, actually I have not even seen it. I think
>>>>> you owe me an apology for this.
>>>>> I also would like to get the opinion of the TSC on the above accusation.
> 
> Please pay attention, I responded to rolfs mail, not yours
> 
>> You are quoting only from my email and have edited all of Rolfs' text
>> away, so although technically you might be responding to his email, by
>> keeping only my text you create the impression that the reaction is
>> towards me.

I am not, this was Rolfs mail:

- -----------

Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> > Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
> > DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
back then and I think it makes sense now.

I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?

- -----------

So that's 2 lines by you, 4 lines by rolf, and I included them all, with
proper quotation levels.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFLfEffMkyGM64RGpERAuMPAJ96ERFwAYIhR+eC3JphENgeTtO2rwCfU6yZ
BPP4J17PFllKuh18Lsqc0vw=
=C9Ex
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 17-02-10 20:40, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
>> On 17-02-10 19:58, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
>>>>> On 30-01-10 11:47, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
>>>>>>>> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>>>>>>>>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
>>>>>>>> back then and I think it makes sense now.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
>>>>>>>> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
>>>>>
>>>>> of all the ways to solve it, you just had to go out of your way to annoy
>>>>> people.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I BEG YOUR PARDON
>>>>>
>>>>>> I did not make the change, actually I have not even seen it. I think
>>>>>> you owe me an apology for this.
>>>>>> I also would like to get the opinion of the TSC on the above accusation.
>>
>> Please pay attention, I responded to rolfs mail, not yours
>>
>>> You are quoting only from my email and have edited all of Rolfs' text
>>> away, so although technically you might be responding to his email, by
>>> keeping only my text you create the impression that the reaction is
>>> towards me.
>
> I am not, this was Rolfs mail:
>
> - -----------
>
> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> > Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>> > DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
> back then and I think it makes sense now.
>
> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
>
> - -----------
>
> So that's 2 lines by you, 4 lines by rolf, and I included them all, with
> proper quotation levels.

Apologies, I misread the indents.
FM

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
>
> iD8DBQFLfEffMkyGM64RGpERAuMPAJ96ERFwAYIhR+eC3JphENgeTtO2rwCfU6yZ
> BPP4J17PFllKuh18Lsqc0vw=
> =C9Ex
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:

>>> FYI: I popped a question three weeks ago.
>>> Today Rolf asked me about the status in #oe.
>>> As you can see above 4 people (Rolf, Mickey, Phil and me were in
>>> favour of the proposal. In irc mckoan also backed the proposal.
>>> There was one person opposed to it: you.
>
> And funnily enough I'm the maintainer, so I get the final say.

Still wondering what makes you the maintainer.

git log does not mention any changes for this file by you (apart from
yesterdays revert):
See http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/recipes/images/console-base-image.bb

Btw in the commit message you write
"If you're touching a recipe at least make sure the creator/maintainer
agrees with your changes."

How come this "rule" suddenly appears. I have never heard about this
rule, and frankly speaking I have not seen this kind of respect from
you when changing other peoples' recipes.

Frans.

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 18-02-10 10:18, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
> 
>>>> FYI: I popped a question three weeks ago.
>>>> Today Rolf asked me about the status in #oe.
>>>> As you can see above 4 people (Rolf, Mickey, Phil and me were in
>>>> favour of the proposal. In irc mckoan also backed the proposal.
>>>> There was one person opposed to it: you.
>>
>> And funnily enough I'm the maintainer, so I get the final say.
> 
> Still wondering what makes you the maintainer.
> 
> git log does not mention any changes for this file by you (apart from
> yesterdays revert):
> See http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/recipes/images/console-base-image.bb

Git doesn't track renames properly, using the parent of the
packages->recipes commit:

http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/packages/images/console-image.bb?id=fa6cd5a3b993f16c27de4ff82b42684516d433ba

And that stops on a rename as well.

> 
> Btw in the commit message you write
> "If you're touching a recipe at least make sure the creator/maintainer
> agrees with your changes."
> 
> How come this "rule" suddenly appears.

It hasn't suddenly appeared, and furthermore console-image is widely
used enough to label it 'core', so any changes will need to get
reviewed, which they weren't in this case.

And non-angstrom people created angstrom-named new recipes without any
approval from angstrom developers is just plain rude.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFLfQtuMkyGM64RGpERAuLxAJ9nhJE4wv6U+TDleoStwvk+suGAhACguLZF
2RCLURHCtcP3Zq21cd3VjNo=
=tR5o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/2/18 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 18-02-10 10:18, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
>>
>>>>> FYI: I popped a question three weeks ago.
>>>>> Today Rolf asked me about the status in #oe.
>>>>> As you can see above 4 people (Rolf, Mickey, Phil and me were in
>>>>> favour of the proposal. In irc mckoan also backed the proposal.
>>>>> There was one person opposed to it: you.
>>>
>>> And funnily enough I'm the maintainer, so I get the final say.
>>
>> Still wondering what makes you the maintainer.
>>
>> git log does not mention any changes for this file by you (apart from
>> yesterdays revert):
>> See http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/recipes/images/console-base-image.bb
>
> Git doesn't track renames properly, using the parent of the
> packages->recipes commit:
>
> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/packages/images/console-image.bb?id=fa6cd5a3b993f16c27de4ff82b42684516d433ba

The parent is http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/packages/images/console-base-image.bb
we're talking about console-base-image here.

>
> And that stops on a rename as well.
>
>>
>> Btw in the commit message you write
>> "If you're touching a recipe at least make sure the creator/maintainer
>> agrees with your changes."
>>
>> How come this "rule" suddenly appears.
>
> It hasn't suddenly appeared, and furthermore console-image is widely
> used enough to label it 'core', so any changes will need to get
> reviewed, which they weren't in this case.
>
> And non-angstrom people created angstrom-named new recipes without any
> approval from angstrom developers is just plain rude.

Sorry, I have no idea who the angstrom developers are or what recipes
are angstrom recipes (unless the name explicitly says so).
I thought we were all openembedded developers.
Anyway, the recipes created by me are openembedded recipes not
angstrom recipes (for what it is worth).
That is also why they live in openembedded/recipes (and not angstrom/recipes).

If you feel so picky about other people touching your recipes, I
suggest to move them to a separate directory or overlay, so people
know when they are breaking new ground.

And finally (and yes I know I am repeating myself): please do unto
others as you would have them do unto you.
If you do not give respect, don't complain of getting none back.

Just my eur 0.02

FM.

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
>
> iD8DBQFLfQtuMkyGM64RGpERAuLxAJ9nhJE4wv6U+TDleoStwvk+suGAhACguLZF
> 2RCLURHCtcP3Zq21cd3VjNo=
> =tR5o
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 18-02-10 11:11, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> 2010/2/18 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
> On 18-02-10 10:18, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
>>>>
>>>>>>> FYI: I popped a question three weeks ago.
>>>>>>> Today Rolf asked me about the status in #oe.
>>>>>>> As you can see above 4 people (Rolf, Mickey, Phil and me were in
>>>>>>> favour of the proposal. In irc mckoan also backed the proposal.
>>>>>>> There was one person opposed to it: you.
>>>>>
>>>>> And funnily enough I'm the maintainer, so I get the final say.
>>>>
>>>> Still wondering what makes you the maintainer.
>>>>
>>>> git log does not mention any changes for this file by you (apart from
>>>> yesterdays revert):
>>>> See http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/recipes/images/console-base-image.bb
> 
> Git doesn't track renames properly, using the parent of the
> packages->recipes commit:
> 
> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/packages/images/console-image.bb?id=fa6cd5a3b993f16c27de4ff82b42684516d433ba
> 
>> The parent is http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/packages/images/console-base-image.bb
>> we're talking about console-base-image here.

No, we are not talking about console-base-image, read the subject of
this mail: "Re: [oe] {RFC] console-image.bb"

Try doing 'git log --follow recipes/images/console-image.bb' in your OE
checkout and see the ancestry of console-image for the past 3.5 years.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFLfR+sMkyGM64RGpERAohgAKCd3wFWYQNGAUKQs3DNAGZuSpSqegCffcar
DIYf1a3TDpSf/Uh5KsEhrpc=
=uB87
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Frans Meulenbroeks]

2010/2/18 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 18-02-10 11:11, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> 2010/2/18 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
>> On 18-02-10 10:18, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>>>> 2010/2/17 Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> FYI: I popped a question three weeks ago.
>>>>>>>> Today Rolf asked me about the status in #oe.
>>>>>>>> As you can see above 4 people (Rolf, Mickey, Phil and me were in
>>>>>>>> favour of the proposal. In irc mckoan also backed the proposal.
>>>>>>>> There was one person opposed to it: you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And funnily enough I'm the maintainer, so I get the final say.
>>>>>
>>>>> Still wondering what makes you the maintainer.
>>>>>
>>>>> git log does not mention any changes for this file by you (apart from
>>>>> yesterdays revert):
>>>>> See http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/recipes/images/console-base-image.bb
>>
>> Git doesn't track renames properly, using the parent of the
>> packages->recipes commit:
>>
>> http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/packages/images/console-image.bb?id=fa6cd5a3b993f16c27de4ff82b42684516d433ba
>>
>>> The parent is http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/log/packages/images/console-base-image.bb
>>> we're talking about console-base-image here.
>
> No, we are not talking about console-base-image, read the subject of
> this mail: "Re: [oe] {RFC] console-image.bb"
>
> Try doing 'git log --follow recipes/images/console-image.bb' in your OE
> checkout and see the ancestry of console-image for the past 3.5 years.

As I already explained in the 3rd message of this email I
misremembered the name when typing the message. See quoted text below.
This should also be clear from the context of the message
And the commit you reverted is also on console-base-image.bb:
http://cgit.openembedded.org/cgit.cgi/openembedded/commit/?id=8679a8574893ac8cd3beeebe2e62084b94660999
not console-image.bb

Rolf did not touch console-image and console-image does not contain
angstrom specifics.

Frans.


2010/1/30 Frans Meulenbroeks <fransmeulenbroeks@gmail.com>:
> 2010/1/30 Rolf Leggewie <no2spam@nospam.arcornews.de>:
>> Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>> Wouldn't it be cleaner to rename ANGSTROM_EXTRA_INSTALL to e.g.
>>> DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL ?
>>
>> This has been discussed before, but not changed.  I think it made sense
>> back then and I think it makes sense now.
>>
>> I believe there is even a better name than DISTRO_EXTRA_INSTALL to be
>> found for the variable.  Maybe IMAGE_EXTRA_INSTALL?
>>
> Actually mistyped tye filename, it was console-base-image.bb
> and in the beginning it says that it is an angstrom bootstrap image,
> so having angstrom specific env vars in it makes sense, but guess the
> name then should be angstrom-console-base-image.bb, just like other
> images are prefixed with openmoko, nylon, opie, slugos and whatever
>

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Rolf Leggewie]

Philip Balister wrote:
> Slow down guys, you are spinning out of control. The problem is not so 
> much the change, just the silent method in which it was accomplished.

There's nothing silent about this.  It was all discussed here (you will
remember that you were in favor).  But there are unfortunately people in
OE that cannot be discussed with, because they act as dictators.

We already have improved on the original proposal and if necessary could
have improved on the current commit.  But that's not in the dictator's
interest and therefor we see the usual pattern of
"revert-to-what-*I*-can-use-and-give-a-f*ck-about-everybody-else" and to
top it off, the recipe is declared off-limits.  The dictator tries to
increase the size of his fiefdom as we've seen so many times in the past.

You cannot collaborate or discuss with a dictator, there's ample
evidence to that.

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Rolf Leggewie]

Koen Kooi wrote:
> It hasn't suddenly appeared, and furthermore console-image is widely
> used enough to label it 'core'

nonsense, another of your ad-hoc rules

BTW, why have you not replied to Mickey? What he quotes apparently was
made an official rule (although the doc team was never asked to include
it in the wiki AFAICT).

It's always the same pattern with you.  At least you're consistent in
your inconsistency.

> And non-angstrom people created angstrom-named new recipes without any
> approval from angstrom developers is just plain rude.

you're a nut case, plain and simple.

First you complain about the name angstrom- being stripped from the
recipe, then you complain about it being reintroduced and label that as
"just plain rude" (since you're the expert on courtesy as we all know).

I suggest you seek medical help.

Re: {RFC] console-image.bb

[Richard Purdie]

On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 13:38 +0100, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
> Koen Kooi wrote:
> > It hasn't suddenly appeared, and furthermore console-image is widely
> > used enough to label it 'core'
> 
> nonsense, another of your ad-hoc rules
> 
> BTW, why have you not replied to Mickey? What he quotes apparently was
> made an official rule (although the doc team was never asked to include
> it in the wiki AFAICT).
> 
> It's always the same pattern with you.  At least you're consistent in
> your inconsistency.
> 
> > And non-angstrom people created angstrom-named new recipes without any
> > approval from angstrom developers is just plain rude.
> 
> you're a nut case, plain and simple.

Do you think this is really helping your case here?

I hope we can agree that no, personal insults are not going to help.

I don't care who started it, I don't care who said what first and this
is not a kindergarten, even if some people want to act like it is.

We have a problem, that much is clear. The TSC and the e.V. itself are
looking at it. Rightly or wrongly we have people in different timezones
and this is going to take time.

I'm going to ask that those groups be given the time and space to do
their jobs.

Until they've done that can everyone please try and calm down before
this blows out of all proportion.

Cheers,

Richard