From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OekrY-0006wx-Uw for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:22:51 +0200 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OekrC-0002Sa-5F for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:22:18 +0200 Received: from s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl ([85.145.118.37]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:22:18 +0200 Received: from k.kooi by s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:22:18 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:22:06 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4C516EF8.3080804@balister.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: s55917625.adsl.wanadoo.nl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100718 Shredder/3.0.7pre In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 80.91.229.12 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gcho-openembedded-devel@m.gmane.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: OE recipe tree quality 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: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:22:51 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 30-07-10 09:21, Esben Haabendal wrote: > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Philip Balister wrote: >> >> >> On 07/29/2010 05:45 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: >>> >>> -----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. >> >> bitbake world seems to be the source of pointless listserv discussions. Does >> it serve any purpose? > > Pointless or not really depends on how you look at quality. > > If you look at it as you, Koen and other OE long-timers, yes, it looks > rather pointless to have bitbake world. > But for those of us who have a different view on what quality is, then > bitbake world serves a purpose. As Thomas points out, as soon as you start blacklisting things (which actually increases quality), bitbake world doesn't work anymore. That alone should be enough to kill it. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFMUouuMkyGM64RGpERAl42AKCE62tZc4ZGAH5WiLMPFNwn/YY0cACfTmMz /YBK4XU/u1PuqmzoyXbF1f8= =TNJJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----