All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* {TSC] request to discuss items.
@ 2010-03-01 19:33 Frans Meulenbroeks
  2010-03-01 21:01 ` Philip Balister
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Frans Meulenbroeks @ 2010-03-01 19:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: openembedded-devel

As we have (as far as I know) no procedure to table issues for the
TSC, I'm proposing two issues for the TSC:

1) the location of distro specific files
2) how to handle legacy recipes that are not used by any known distro

Both have been discussed on this list, and several options have been coined
E.g. for 1) dedicated directories, overlays or retain the current solution
And for 2) an overlay, and "obsolete" directory, retain the current
solution and remove the recipes.

May I ask the TSC to provide a verdict on these.

Thanks alot,
Frans



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: {TSC] request to discuss items.
  2010-03-01 19:33 {TSC] request to discuss items Frans Meulenbroeks
@ 2010-03-01 21:01 ` Philip Balister
  2010-03-01 21:37   ` Frans Meulenbroeks
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Philip Balister @ 2010-03-01 21:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: openembedded-devel

On 03/01/2010 02:33 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> As we have (as far as I know) no procedure to table issues for the
> TSC, I'm proposing two issues for the TSC:

 > 1) the location of distro specific files

This is a little premature ... There is a good discussion going on about 
this at the moment. It takes time for the community to draw a conclusion 
on matters like this.

> 2) how to handle legacy recipes that are not used by any known distro

I'd note that this issue has come up before, and the consensus is no 
major shuffling of recipes for aesthetic reasons. I don't see any 
changes that would change the conclusion this time. I believe all of the 
TSC members are already involved in the on list discussion.

Philip

>
> Both have been discussed on this list, and several options have been coined
> E.g. for 1) dedicated directories, overlays or retain the current solution
> And for 2) an overlay, and "obsolete" directory, retain the current
> solution and remove the recipes.
>
> May I ask the TSC to provide a verdict on these.
>
> Thanks alot,
> Frans
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: {TSC] request to discuss items.
  2010-03-01 21:01 ` Philip Balister
@ 2010-03-01 21:37   ` Frans Meulenbroeks
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Frans Meulenbroeks @ 2010-03-01 21:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: openembedded-devel

2010/3/1 Philip Balister <philip@balister.org>:
> On 03/01/2010 02:33 PM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>>
>> As we have (as far as I know) no procedure to table issues for the
>> TSC, I'm proposing two issues for the TSC:
>
>> 1) the location of distro specific files
>
> This is a little premature ... There is a good discussion going on about
> this at the moment. It takes time for the community to draw a conclusion on
> matters like this.

I thought most arguments were brought up, and it is clear there is no consensus.
actually I'm not sure when the next TSC meeting is, but afaik it is
perfectly ok to move it to the one after that.
Guess a TSC decision will be needed at some point as I don't think
there will be consensus.
>
>> 2) how to handle legacy recipes that are not used by any known distro
>
> I'd note that this issue has come up before, and the consensus is no major
> shuffling of recipes for aesthetic reasons. I don't see any changes that
> would change the conclusion this time. I believe all of the TSC members are
> already involved in the on list discussion.

The overlay mechanism is better supported now, so could act as a help.
And I know that at least one TSC member feels that moving e.g. to an
obsolete dir is a good plan (so guess the consensus is not there any
more).
But again if we feel the discusion has not settled yet and not all
arguments are on the table it can be moved to e.g. the meeting after
the next one.

Frans.

(ps: I object that the change is purely aesthetic; it improves the
parse time, reduces disk space somewhat and imho improves
maintainability).
>
> Philip
>
>>
>> Both have been discussed on this list, and several options have been
>> coined
>> E.g. for 1) dedicated directories, overlays or retain the current solution
>> And for 2) an overlay, and "obsolete" directory, retain the current
>> solution and remove the recipes.
>>
>> May I ask the TSC to provide a verdict on these.
>>
>> Thanks alot,
>> Frans
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-devel mailing list
>> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2010-03-01 21:40 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-03-01 19:33 {TSC] request to discuss items Frans Meulenbroeks
2010-03-01 21:01 ` Philip Balister
2010-03-01 21:37   ` Frans Meulenbroeks

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.