From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 93-97-173-237.zone5.bethere.co.uk ([93.97.173.237] helo=tim.rpsys.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RnILg-0005ZJ-Fx for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:21:52 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0HNE9bU013084; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:14:09 GMT Received: from tim.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (tim.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 12556-05; Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:14:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.3.10] ([192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0HNDxj9013078 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:14:00 GMT Message-ID: <1326842038.2529.4.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:13:58 +0000 In-Reply-To: <1427429.26ZIzxQgNj@helios> References: <1322068148.15626.15.camel@ted> <1412695.vvBBPeJL4B@helios> <1427429.26ZIzxQgNj@helios> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: Koen Kooi , Phil Blundell Subject: Process for New DISTRO_FEATURES (was: 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: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:21:52 -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: > > > On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 16:48 +0000, Phil Blundell wrote: > > > > b) introduce some sort of concept of "feature epochs", where the > > > > DISTRO > > > > gets to declare what epoch it is expecting and the compatibility > > > > code > > > > then backfills DISTRO_FEATURES to take account of things that were > > > > enabled by default in past epochs but have since been removed. This > > > > introduces a certain extra maintenance burden but it means that > > > > DISTROs > > > > will no longer get unpleasant surprises > > > > > > 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? In the intervening time I haven't come up with anything better. I would like to move forward on this issue. I think the main thing is to document the variables clearly. The names aren't brilliant but with reasonable comments we should be ok... Cheers, Richard