From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1TJPR9-0001qN-6o for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 15:56:31 +0200 Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Oct 2012 06:43:29 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,528,1344236400"; d="scan'208";a="229442231" Received: from unknown (HELO helios.localnet) ([10.252.122.52]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Oct 2012 06:43:23 -0700 From: Paul Eggleton To: Koen Kooi Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 14:43:22 +0100 Message-ID: <5056040.jAUIlqh764@helios> Organization: Intel Corporation User-Agent: KMail/4.9.1 (Linux/3.2.0-31-generic-pae; KDE/4.9.1; i686; ; ) In-Reply-To: <74B58CA1-2332-42D6-9652-4226D9484259@dominion.thruhere.net> References: <1396458.ob1fernpZs@helios> <74B58CA1-2332-42D6-9652-4226D9484259@dominion.thruhere.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org" Subject: Re: [meta-webserver][PATCH 0/6] Add meta-webserver X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 13:56:31 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Wednesday 03 October 2012 15:12:55 Koen Kooi wrote: > Op 3 okt. 2012, om 14:23 heeft Paul Eggleton het volgende geschreven: > > On Wednesday 03 October 2012 13:43:30 Koen Kooi wrote: > >> Op 3 okt. 2012, om 13:29 heeft Paul Eggleton > >> > > > het volgende geschreven: > >>> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 13:27:41 Koen Kooi wrote: > >>>> Op 3 okt. 2012 om 12:43 heeft Paul Eggleton > >>>> > >>> > >>> het volgende geschreven: > >>>>> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 12:24:19 Koen Kooi wrote: > >>>>>> Squash those "import" with the "fix" commits, no sense in having a > >>>>>> broken > >>>>>> recipe in there. > >>>>> > >>>>> I'd rather not - there is sense in being clear about the changes, > >>>>> because > >>>>> there are a large number of them in this case. > >>>> > >>>> The broken recipes are still available in OE classic if people want to > >>>> compare them. I still don't get why you want to have broken recipes in > >>>> the > >>>> tree at multiple points in your series. > >>> > >>> Because I want to easily see in "git blame" where particular lines came > >>> from - did I add them, or have they been around for ages? > >> > >> Does oe-core have the same flow for new recipes? > > > > You already know the answer to this. > > No I don't, actually. The answer is no, it doesn't. I guess on reflection we probably ought to be consistent here though - for better or worse, this is not what has been done when pulling in recipes from OE-Classic for the rest of meta-openembedded. The commit message does already list the changes from the original, and I'll concede that having just one revision doesn't give a huge amount in the way of insight on previous origin; ultimately as you say, OE-Classic is still there as a reference for that. OK, I've squashed those commits out on the branch. Would it be worth me posting a v2 after all these changes? Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre