From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay1.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.131]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QKEJ3-00010S-Oz for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 20:38:46 +0200 Received: from svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.93]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1QKEGL-0003PS-Iv from Tom_Rini@mentor.com ; Wed, 11 May 2011 11:35:57 -0700 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-04.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.97.41]) by svr-orw-fem-01.mgc.mentorg.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 11 May 2011 11:35:47 -0700 Received: from [172.30.80.16] (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-04.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.97.41) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.270.1; Wed, 11 May 2011 11:35:46 -0700 Message-ID: <4DCAD6EE.5050609@mentor.com> Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 11:35:26 -0700 From: Tom Rini Organization: Mentor Graphics Corporation User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Darren Hart References: <4DCAB609.8030601@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <4DCAB609.8030601@linux.intel.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 May 2011 18:35:47.0162 (UTC) FILETIME=[3E867BA0:01CC100A] Cc: Martin Jansa , Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer , "poky@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: RFC: create-pull-request / send-pull-request updates 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, 11 May 2011 18:38:46 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 05/11/2011 09:15 AM, Darren Hart wrote: > Between myself and others, there are several outstanding proposals to > modify the pull-request scripts. Patches have been sent, but nothing has > been merged due to a lack of consensus. I thought I would summarize what > I see to be the current weaknesses of the scripts and my proposal to > address them. I would like your feedback to ensure we have tools that > meet the needs of a broad user base. Once we agree, I'll be happy to > write up the patches or help review those written by others. Thanks for taking this up! [snip] > 2) create-pull-request needs to facilitate the use of multiple > repositories (Tom Rini) So long as (a) it's supported and (b) it's easy to use, I'm fine with however you want to implement it :) Which brings me to... [snip] > 3) Rewrite the scripts in python (Tom) > > While I agree that anything of any significant complexity is better > written in python than bash, I feel that with the above changes, the > current scripts will be smaller and remain simple enough for bash to > be a viable option. > > I propose we leave the scripts in bash for the time being, leaving > the door open to rewrite them at a later date should their complexity > increase to merit the effort. To me, dealing with some sort of prefs file means non-bash. But if you can figure out everything that's needed with a little bit of asking git and a little bit of standard-shell-magic (which it sounds like you can), yeah, keeping it in bash is fine. -- Tom Rini Mentor Graphics Corporation