From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF57B60CDD for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2013 15:44:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VxIXB-0002xz-7W for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:44:09 +0100 Received: from ip4da2a5ae.direct-adsl.nl ([77.162.165.174]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:44:09 +0100 Received: from koen by ip4da2a5ae.direct-adsl.nl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:44:09 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org From: Koen Kooi Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:44:52 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1801103.RjHpRo2rCi@helios> <52BF51CC.4040300@balister.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip4da2a5ae.direct-adsl.nl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 In-Reply-To: <52BF51CC.4040300@balister.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: Piglit in Poky X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 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: Sun, 29 Dec 2013 15:44:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Philip Balister schreef op 28-12-13 23:33: > On 12/28/2013 10:28 AM, Koen Kooi wrote: >> Paul Eggleton schreef op 28-12-13 12:48: >>> Hi Koen, >> >>> On Tuesday 24 December 2013 15:22:32 Koen Kooi wrote: >>>> Burton, Ross schreef op 23-12-13 19:01: >>>>> We'd like to integrate Piglit (an OpenGL test suite) into Poky >>>>> so that we can run automated QA on the GL stack. Piglit is >>>>> currently residing in meta-oe, but as Poky is a self-contained >>>>> project we can't just add meta-oe to it: apart from the size of >>>>> meta-oe, we can't ensure stability if meta-oe makes incompatible >>>>> changes that affect Poky. >>>>> >>>>> Piglit isn't a stand-alone package, there are the dependencies >>>>> of waffle, python-mako and python-numpy to consider too. There >>>>> are two possibilities I can see: >>>>> >>>>> 1) Move piglit and deps to oe-core. Piglit is for QA purposes >>>>> only and pushes the boundaries of "core platform". In a sense >>>>> this is a repeat of the discussion we had with Midori... does >>>>> oe-core contain everything needed to sufficiently exercise the >>>>> core components it ships or not? >>>>> >>>>> 2) Add piglit and deps to meta-yocto. Probably a new layer >>>>> called meta-yocto-qa (or similar) because the Yocto Compatible >>>>> guidelines forbid mixing distribution policy and recipes. >>>> >>>> Speaking of layers, can you *please* rename meta-yocto to >>>> meta-poky? It's what it's actually is and would remove a lot of >>>> confusion when trying to explain that yocto is not a distro, even >>>> if the distro layer is called 'meta-yocto'. >> >>> This is a tangent, but a couple of points: >> >>> 1) This rename would not come for free. We'd need to update people's >>> existing bblayers.conf files on the fly, as we did when >>> meta-yocto-bsp was split out of meta-yocto, and thus bump >>> LCONF_VERSION; however, doing this only in poky has resulted in >>> annoying problems when users remove poky from their configurations >>> (since LCONF_VERSION is out-of-step between Poky and OE-Core, leading >>> to confusing errors in this situation). Thus I think we'd want to >>> solve this once and for all by bumping the value in OE-Core as well >>> as Poky. >> >>> 2) If you propose this rename, perhaps you will also consider >>> renaming meta-oe, since that name within a similarly named >>> meta-openembedded repository leads to a similar level of >>> confusion...? >> >> I have no problems with renaming that layer since I get confused by >> this a few times a week myself :) > > What would we we rename it to? I'm very tempted to suggest 'meta-yocto' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iD8DBQFSwEN0MkyGM64RGpERAnuDAKC5kxJXiSjM0RtJPu8Gksu4t7IaOACdFyyq vPBlgjhnZyECigXVQNUkj1U= =laEu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----