From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2i9R-00041S-1u for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:52:25 +0100 Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Mar 2011 03:50:32 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.63,236,1299484800"; d="scan'208";a="724082428" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.255.16.82]) ([10.255.16.82]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Mar 2011 03:50:31 -0700 From: Joshua Lock To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org In-Reply-To: <20110324074926.GR2224@xora-desktop.xora.org.uk> References: <6CA3B184-AD05-4A9B-90CE-25AE38DECA39@dominion.thruhere.net> <20110323154018.GI2224@xora-desktop.xora.org.uk> <1300896184.3488.17.camel@scimitar> <20110323175229.GN2224@xora-desktop.xora.org.uk> <1300921337.3018.45.camel@rex> <20110323235316.GQ2224@xora-desktop.xora.org.uk> <4D8A88FF.8070600@balister.org> <1300926448.3018.69.camel@rex> <20110324074926.GR2224@xora-desktop.xora.org.uk> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:50:25 +0000 Message-ID: <1300963825.2752.3.camel@scimitar> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 (2.32.2-1.fc14) Subject: Re: [RFC] recipes-efl inside meta-oe or meta-efl next to meta-oe? X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:52:25 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2011-03-24 at 07:49 +0000, Graeme Gregory wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:27:28AM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote: > > Have either of you ever tried to explain some of the concepts we're > > dealing with to people who aren't deeply engaged engineers? > > > Yes, everytime I apply for a new job/contract getting quite used to > explaining it. > > > Having a model showing the kinds of things layers can do is extremely > > helpful in explaining the concept to people. > > > > Part of OE's problem and the number one complaint about it is that its > > hard to understand. If as I/others try and put things into terms that > > others can understand get undermined with this kind of response its just > > going to further the impression that OE is nice but never going to be > > useful in the real world. > > > > As for whether that diagram is practical, I actually believe it is in > > some cases, like the one I described above. Certainly not all but its > > worth trying to strive to simplify and make things fit simpler models > > if/when we can. If we don't even bother trying, there is no chance > > things will improve. > > > > You miss my point, Joshua's email reads to me like "our goal is to make OE > like this diagram" which if true would cripple OE to being incredibly simple > and non flexible. It certainly wasn't my intention to imply that, in fact the "me too" strongly indicates that I agreed with you and that I personally thought the diagram was a useful *aide* in explaining layers. > > My vision of a seperated out OE is to seperate components out into logical > boxes. Ie the gnome box, the kde box, the xorg box. Then like we used to do > with our lego or mecheno sets. When we want to build something we know what > components we want so we select the boxes that contain those components. FWIW, this is the same vision I was already agreeing with. Regards, Joshua -- Joshua Lock Yocto Build System Monkey Intel Open Source Technology Centre