From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.pbcl.net ([88.198.119.4] helo=hetzner.pbcl.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RmrAY-0002ga-TW for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:20:36 +0100 Received: from 50-78-106-41-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([50.78.106.41] helo=[10.1.0.230]) by hetzner.pbcl.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Rmr3A-0006hn-Vn; Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:12:57 +0100 Message-ID: <1326737570.3367.19.camel@pb-ThinkPad-R50e> From: Phil Blundell To: Paul Eggleton Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 18:12:50 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1427429.26ZIzxQgNj@helios> References: <1322068148.15626.15.camel@ted> <1412695.vvBBPeJL4B@helios> <1427429.26ZIzxQgNj@helios> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.1- Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Koen Kooi , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Make pulseaudio a DISTRO_FEATURE 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: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 18:20:37 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 2012-01-16 at 17:58 +0000, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Thursday 29 December 2011 12:55:56 Paul Eggleton wrote: > > On Wednesday 23 November 2011 17:09:08 Richard Purdie wrote: > > > I'm wondering if we can do something in the core like: > > > > > > DISTRO_FEATURES_BACKFILLOPTS = "pulseaudio" > > > > > > and have the distro set: > > > > > > DISTRO_FEATURES_BACKFILLCONSIDERED = "" > > > > > > and then add some code which looks for anything in > > > DISTRO_FEATURES_BACKFILLOPTS but not in > > > DISTRO_FEATURES_BACKFILLCONSIDERED and adds it to DISTRO_FEATURES. > > > > > > Distros can then opt out of a given feature by adding it to > > > DISTRO_FEATURES_BACKFILLCONSIDERED. > > > > > > This would let us maintain compatibility but also move forward and > > > create new settings with names that make sense. > > > > I'd like to try to move forward with this fix (although I prefer an > > alternative term to "backfill", perhaps "introduce" instead?) If this is > > what we want to do, should it be implemented by: > > > > (a) modifying DISTRO_FEATURES directly (as I think Richard is suggesting), > > or > > > > (b) a simple python call that the distro needs to add to their own > > DISTRO_FEATURES (i.e. "${@distro_features_introduce(d)}" ? > > > > Option (a) is a little tidier but (b) makes it obvious where any introduced > > items in DISTRO_FEATURES are coming from. > > This was brought up at the last TSC meeting, but we agreed to leave the > discussion on the mailing list for the moment. > > So, any thoughts? Personally I prefer option (a) and Richard's terminology. I think the "introduce" naming is a bit too vague and generic and doesn't really capture what's going on here. p.