From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Quotient Remainder Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 13:28:10 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH/RFC] Download sources from Git (and more) In-Reply-To: <20100713200820.1a5fcc60@surf> References: <1278970252-23007-1-git-send-email-luca@lucaceresoli.net> <1279032219.2887.78.camel@dubciaranr1.verifone.com> <20100713200820.1a5fcc60@surf> Message-ID: <1279110490.7058.155.camel@cabbage.rehill.info> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Tue, 2010-07-13 at 20:08 +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > I understand this need: use Buildroot not only as an integration system > to produce the final system, but also during the development of the > application. For the moment, our recommended practice for this is to > work on the application outside of Buildroot, as Buildroot is not > well-suited for doing this. > > Adding such a capability to Buildroot requires a fairly wide > brainstorming and discussion to propose a global design that solves > this question. What do we want to achieve ? What is the exact use > case ? How all development steps are going to work ? > > For that reason, I think Maxime's patch is saner: it adds the simple > capability of downloading a package from GIT/SVN, without changing the > existing Buildroot workflow. A combination of the best of the two may be the way to go. > I'm really open to changing the Buildroot workflow, but: > > 1. I think it requires a much more detailed discussion about *what* we > need and then *how* we implement it. > > 2. I'd prefer to do such major changes once the Buildroot cleanup > phase (started in January 2009) is more or less completed, so that > we start with a Buildroot from which we are satisfied in terms of > quality before starting adding major features such as turning > Buildroot into a development system and not only an integration > system. I think it's more important to make Buildroot work properly > with the feature-set we have today than having dozens of > half-thought features. > > As such a change wouldn't probably occur before 2010.08, I'd prefer to > have a solution similar to Maxime's merged into the tree for the > moment, and having someone seriously starting the discussion on the > Buildroot future as a development system. > Understood; that's perfectly reasonable. The amount of work going into this project these days in phenomenal. It is already a great tool but the cleanup should make it all the more accessible. I don't mind doing some throwaway work in the meantime in order to spark some discussion on the points you raised above. > Best regards, > > Thomas BTW, I hope I'm not stepping on toes by commenting here on this topic. I'm eager to get something working but I realise there are many here that have much greater oversight on what's needed.