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 1SKaCZ-0003Vu-CF for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 21:06:03 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tim.rpsys.net (8.13.6/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q3IIuavx005253; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:56:36 +0100 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 04516-04; Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:56:32 +0100 (BST) 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 q3IIuSGG005245 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:56:29 +0100 Message-ID: <1334775390.24091.173.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:56:30 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1334760467.24091.100.camel@ted> <20120418145330.GM3635@jama.jama.net> <1334762445.24091.110.camel@ted> <1334768537.24091.156.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rpsys.net Cc: yocto Subject: Re: Yocto Project 1.2 Release Status 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: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:06:03 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 10:11 -0700, Chris Larson wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Chris Larson wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Richard Purdie > > wrote: > >> On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 09:22 -0700, Chris Larson wrote: > >>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Richard Purdie > >>> wrote: > >>> > On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 16:53 +0200, Martin Jansa wrote: > >>> Just because people have things to push or are pushing things which > >>> aren't bugfixes doesn't mean their time is being taken up by anything > >>> but stabilization right now. Your statement implies that everything > >>> being pushed is being currently worked on, which is incorrect. I'm > >>> sure Mentor isn't the only company with a backlog of already complete > >>> local changes to get upstream.. > >> > >> So you're saying Mentor has been working on stabilization and has a > >> queue of bugfixes which they've not shared? > > > > No, I never said they were just bugfixes. If they were low impact > > bugfixes, they'd have a shot at making it into the release, especially > > if they're critical, no? They would have had a shot until very recently, yes. I'm hoping we're about done with the release at this point as a line has to be drawn somewhere and I think now is it. > Further, again you're ignoring previous work. Whether we've been > working on stabilization right now is irrelevent given we have > previous work to push. Mentor has been using OE for its products for > years, to expect that a very small team which has to focus on customer > issues is going to catch up on all of that effort in a short period of > time is unreasonable. We've been working against our backlog for > months, and will continue to do so until we're caught up. The frozen > tree just slows that down even more. > > If you want folks like us working more closely with upstream, then you > have to realize that folks are going to have changes to push which > aren't bugfixes (or aren't critical), and contrary to your > implication, does not imply that folks are ignoring the stabilization > efffort. Previous work needs to go up, and isn't occupying current > development effort. Let me be clear, nothing I said is meant as a criticism as we all have constraints to work within, me included and I'm familiar with the problem. In the Mentor case I can feel some sympathy as I remember ELC-E 2007 where Embedded Alley presented about OE. I was sitting next to Holger in the audience and they announced major improvements to BitBake. This was somewhat of a surprise to the BitBake developers sitting there and I went and asked where the patches were. I'm not sure we ever did get them. I can therefore imagine some of the backlog you speak of. I know this is going to change and get better in future, we need to work through the backlog and that will take time on all sides. Every partner in the project has some issues they are working through in one form or another be it backlog, transition or otherwise. Posting non-bugfixes is fine at the moment as long as people have a reasonable expectation about the fact they won't merge immediately. I appreciate you understand that, equally there are others on this mailing list who don't and I do have to keep mentioning it for that reason :(. Cheers, Richard