Re: [PATCH 0/1] Embedded Maintainer(s), linux-embedded@vger list

[David VomLehn <dvomlehn@cisco.com>]

James Chapman wrote:
> David VomLehn wrote:
>> Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>>> * Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> schrieb:
>>>  
>>>> Cross compiling breaks stuff, yes.
>>>>
>>>> Most packages don't cross compile at all.  Debian has somewhere 
>>>> north of 30,000 packages.  Every project that does large scale 
>>>> cross compiling (buildroot, gentoo embedded, timesys making fedora 
>>>> cross compile, etc) tends to have about 200 packages that cross 
>>>> compile more or less easily, another 400 or so that can be made to 
>>>> cross compile with _lot_ of effort and a large enough rock, and 
>>>> then the project stalls at about that size.
>>>>     
>>>
>>> The problem is: most embedded projects don't make really 
>>> general-purpose
>>> fixes (instead strange things like hacking up autogenerated files), 
>>> so they can't feed back to upstream.
>>>
>>> IMHO, a huge waste of working time.
>>>   
>> Amen, brother. I'm fortunate in that I work for an organization that 
>> is quite good about enforcing code reviews, specifically, the QA 
>> organization is empowered to reject changes that do not have code 
>> review notes. I also have a fairly broad scope, so I'm in on code 
>> reviews for a number of open source components. At each such review, 
>> one of my criteria is whether the change is suitable for pushing back 
>> to the appropriate community. This is not necessarily a short-term 
>> way to make friends, but the long-term effects will be good both for 
>> the company and for the open source community in general.
>>
>> Now, if we can only get the time to actually push all the backlogged 
>> fixes out...
>
> Er, is that GPL or LGPL code that you're modifying? If so, you *have* 
> to push those code changes out (make them available to others), 
> whether you think people will be interested or not!
>
I guess I'm making a distinction that wasn't clear. We *have* to make
the code available, and I can assure you that Cisco is very aware of our
obligations in this area and I spend a fair amount of my time trying to
ensure they are met.

I used the term "push" to mean getting patches ready, posting them to the 
appropriate mailing lists, revising them in light of comments, and doing 
everything else necessary to get them incorporated into the kernel source base. 
"Pushing" is a lot more work than just making source available, but also yield 
much more productive long term results for everyone.

-- 
David VomLehn, dvomlehn@cisco.com
The opinions expressed herein are likely mine, but might not be my employer's...






     - - - - -                              Cisco                            - - - - -         
This e-mail and any attachments may contain information which is confidential, 
proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected by law. The information is solely 
intended for the named addressee (or a person responsible for delivering it to 
the addressee). If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are 
not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any 
part of it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender 
immediately by return e-mail and delete it from your computer.