Re: [OE-core] [PATCH v4 2/7] barebox-tools: add initial barebox tools support

Alexander Kanavin
2024-09-10T09:22:53Z

On Tue, 10 Sept 2024 at 11:02, Enrico Jörns <ejo@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> My impression was that the actual amount of things to share would not justify another file.
> It is mainly license information, SRC_URI and a bit of metadata where I found it more obvious to
> have them in the respective recipe.
>
> If having shared parts in a barebox-common.inc is actually preferable, I could rework this of
> course.

It is yes. They are the same between recipes, and so should be specified once.

> > Also there should be a good DESCRIPTION in there. Why
> > barebox, and not u-boot, for example?
>
> Trying to outdo other projects was not my intention.
> So I would like to omit such comparisons from the description.
>
> My current summary:
>
> "barebox is a bootloader designed for embedded systems.
> It runs on a variety of architectures including x86, ARM, MIPS, PowerPC and others."
>
> does not yet get the point of a bootloader?
> I also thought that adding too much information would make the summary too long.
> But in case something important is missing, I am open to further suggestions.

There's a SUMMARY (which is ok), but there's no DESCRIPTION, and they
are two different texts. We do require a DESCRIPTION that contains a
paragraph or two, with multiple sentences that properly introduce the
project. You don't have to directly compare to u-boot, but you do need
to highlight the best features and advantages of the component. Being
terse or generic in DESCRIPTION is not a good thing, and no
DESCRIPTION at all is even worse.

Alex