From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([93.97.175.187]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UbHwx-0008BJ-2K for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Sun, 12 May 2013 00:07:34 +0200 Received: from localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r4BLnS5w029962; Sat, 11 May 2013 22:52:02 +0100 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at dan.rpsys.net Received: from dan.rpsys.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (dan.rpsys.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id SASaxV9YkHQ0; Sat, 11 May 2013 22:52:02 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.3.10] (rpvlan0 [192.168.3.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by dan.rpsys.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-2.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id r4BLpw7o030000 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 11 May 2013 22:52:00 +0100 Message-ID: <1368308951.11129.108.camel@ted> From: Richard Purdie To: Otavio Salvador Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 22:49:11 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <518A6B25.5000108@r-finger.com> <1368026618.27116.52.camel@ted> <518A7B37.8050308@r-finger.com> <1368176725.11129.9.camel@ted> <518CD26F.3090901@r-finger.com> <1368185566.11129.28.camel@ted> <518D22CC.1040002@r-finger.com> <1368206371.11129.46.camel@ted> <1368224314.11129.65.camel@ted> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.2-0ubuntu0.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: Patches, about the oe-core layer Subject: Re: proposal to move cogl, clutter and related recipes from oe-core to dedicated meta-clutter layer X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 22:07:41 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, 2013-05-11 at 17:39 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Richard Purdie > > Adding mode dimensions to a problem we already struggle with seems like > > a bad idea to me. > > This sounds like you're against the modular design and it is no sense > for me. These dimensions also need test and if it cannot be done, we > have a design flaw. You think I'm against modular design? Seriously? Keep in mind I'm the person who played a big part in helping transition to the layers model in the first place instead of the monolithic OE classic, split up the fetchers in bitbake, split bitbake into client/server/uis and so on. My instinct is suggesting the timing is wrong for this particular change (it may be right for Tomas, I don't think its right for OE-Core). I've said what I plan to say on this now though. I will however raise the point that a lot of people currently have a tendency to "hide behind" me in discussions. They see me reply and assume that since I've said something, that is it and they can keep quiet. I want to be clear this isn't going to work as on this and some other topics, it looks like I'm a lone voice. If people do believe in a particular issue, they do need to stand up and add weight to an argument themselves. Cheers, Richard