Re: OE recipe tree quality

[Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>]

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

On 29-07-10 10:50, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> Given the discussions on quality that sometimes pop up (and also triggered
> by Robert's message), I decided to kick off a bitbake -k world.

Could you first explain to me why 'bitbake world' is a good way to
measure quality?

I would think that building something like console-image and looking at
the following would be a much better metric:

* does it build?
* are all the rootfs types working?
* does the image do what it is supposed to do?
* Are all the licenses of the output packages correct?
* Do the output packages have any spurious deps?
* Is the content of the output packages correct?
* Are there any known CVEs in the resulting packages?
* Did packaged-staging do its job?
* What kind of QA errors and warnings were raised?
* Did all recipes pass recipe_sanity?
* Did all recipes conform to oe-stylize.py?

etc

I would actually advocate removing the 'world' feature from bitbake/OE
to stop people from wasting time on looking at bitbake world and have
them fix actual problems.

regards,

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

iD8DBQFMUU3HMkyGM64RGpERAgioAJ90DxRRG5meARUBbMcQ25jadn4k4QCeKkEd
r4DWO6n6DTFhAucGqx78Yxc=
=Dv4L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----