Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Paul Menzel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 483 bytes --]

Dear OE folks,


it would be great if we could join the lists oe-devel and oe-core again.
As far as I know the only reason the list oe-core was created was to
discuss the initial setup and the creation of oe-core. Now that it has
been setup I do not see any reason to have two separate lists.

I suggest to abandon/archive openembedded-core and use
openembedded-devel.


Thanks,

Paul


PS: Not being subscribed to oe-core I hope the message will make it
through.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Otavio Salvador]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 08:25, Paul Menzel
<paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Dear OE folks,
>
>
> it would be great if we could join the lists oe-devel and oe-core again.
> As far as I know the only reason the list oe-core was created was to
> discuss the initial setup and the creation of oe-core. Now that it has
> been setup I do not see any reason to have two separate lists.
>
> I suggest to abandon/archive openembedded-core and use
> openembedded-devel.

I fully support this merge.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Richard Purdie]

On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:05 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 08:25, Paul Menzel
> <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > Dear OE folks,
> >
> >
> > it would be great if we could join the lists oe-devel and oe-core again.
> > As far as I know the only reason the list oe-core was created was to
> > discuss the initial setup and the creation of oe-core. Now that it has
> > been setup I do not see any reason to have two separate lists.
> >
> > I suggest to abandon/archive openembedded-core and use
> > openembedded-devel.
> 
> I fully support this merge.

I'm not so sure rushing into this is a great idea. Speaking as someone
who has problems trying to figure out where patches are intended for and
who tracks whether they've been applied, I do find the split useful...

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Otavio Salvador]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:19, Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> I fully support this merge.
>
> I'm not so sure rushing into this is a great idea. Speaking as someone
> who has problems trying to figure out where patches are intended for and
> who tracks whether they've been applied, I do find the split useful...

This is a matter of improving the pull request script; avoiding
duplicated places allow for easy sharing of information besides many
OE devels and users are not in oe-core list making duplicated work and
not being aware of changes.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Koen Kooi]

Op 2 sep. 2011, om 15:23 heeft Otavio Salvador het volgende geschreven:

> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:19, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>> I fully support this merge.
>> 
>> I'm not so sure rushing into this is a great idea. Speaking as someone
>> who has problems trying to figure out where patches are intended for and
>> who tracks whether they've been applied, I do find the split useful...
> 
> This is a matter of improving the pull request script; avoiding
> duplicated places allow for easy sharing of information besides many
> OE devels and users are not in oe-core list making duplicated work and
> not being aware of changes.

That sounds like people should just subscribe to oe-core if they want to be aware of changes instead of merging the 2 lists.

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Otavio Salvador]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:33, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> That sounds like people should just subscribe to oe-core if they want to be aware of changes instead of merging the 2 lists.

Many times changes are related to meta-oe and oe-core and we'd need to
cross-post and seems wrong.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Richard Purdie]

On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:53 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:33, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> > That sounds like people should just subscribe to oe-core if they want to be aware of changes instead of merging the 2 lists.
> 
> Many times changes are related to meta-oe and oe-core and we'd need to
> cross-post and seems wrong.

I don't think this is actually true and its reasonable to assume
discussion on OE-Core is seen by everyone.

You therefore need an OE-Core subscription or both with the latter
recommended. The benefit is the two lists give some kind of filtering of
the email topics.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Otavio Salvador]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 13:47, Richard Purdie
<richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:53 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:33, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
>> > That sounds like people should just subscribe to oe-core if they want to be aware of changes instead of merging the 2 lists.
>>
>> Many times changes are related to meta-oe and oe-core and we'd need to
>> cross-post and seems wrong.
>
> I don't think this is actually true and its reasonable to assume
> discussion on OE-Core is seen by everyone.
>
> You therefore need an OE-Core subscription or both with the latter
> recommended. The benefit is the two lists give some kind of filtering of
> the email topics.

I am sorry but I disagree. All those affect the layers and thus
changes on oe-core are important to meta-oe so they are all related.
Besides not everyone follow both.

Personally I've been following mostly oe-core and skipped oe and
someone might be doing the other way around; patch management has
nothing to do with mailing list topic and this we can assume this is
easy to fix using patchwork and proper subject on patches.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Richard Purdie]

On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 14:35 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 13:47, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:53 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:33, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> >> > That sounds like people should just subscribe to oe-core if they want to be aware of changes instead of merging the 2 lists.
> >>
> >> Many times changes are related to meta-oe and oe-core and we'd need to
> >> cross-post and seems wrong.
> >
> > I don't think this is actually true and its reasonable to assume
> > discussion on OE-Core is seen by everyone.
> >
> > You therefore need an OE-Core subscription or both with the latter
> > recommended. The benefit is the two lists give some kind of filtering of
> > the email topics.
> 
> I am sorry but I disagree. All those affect the layers and thus
> changes on oe-core are important to meta-oe so they are all related.
> Besides not everyone follow both.

I think the expectation is you need to subscribe to OE-Core in all cases
and we just need to ensure that expectation is communicated.

This also helps people who want to keep up with core changes but aren't
interested in the upper layer activities. Asking them to filter out a
ton of email on oe-devel simply isn't reasonable.

> Personally I've been following mostly oe-core and skipped oe and
> someone might be doing the other way around; patch management has
> nothing to do with mailing list topic and this we can assume this is
> easy to fix using patchwork and proper subject on patches.

Having done some patch management myself (at least 4095 patches in the
last year) I'll respectfully disagree.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Detlef Vollmann]

On 09/02/11 18:47, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:53 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:33, Koen Kooi<koen@dominion.thruhere.net>  wrote:
>>> That sounds like people should just subscribe to oe-core if they want to be aware of changes instead of merging the 2 lists.
>>
>> Many times changes are related to meta-oe and oe-core and we'd need to
>> cross-post and seems wrong.
>
> I don't think this is actually true and its reasonable to assume
> discussion on OE-Core is seen by everyone.
Currently, the list descriptions read:
"openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Purpose: General discussion & patch submission

openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Purpose: Discussions and patches for OE-Core"

Given this description I see hardly any post to openembedded-core
that shouldn't go to openembedded-devel as well.
But cross-posts are bad.

I'm not against two separate lists, but it should be clear what
should go to which list.  If the separation line is such that
there are more than 10% cross posts, then the lists should be joined.

BTW, some seem to think that openembedded-devel is for OE-Classic,
while openembedded-core should be for the new system (i.e. includes
oe-core and meta-oe).
That might be a better separation line to avoid cross posts, but
if that's what people want, this should be clearly said.

Another separation line would be the old -devel and -users separation.

Personally I could live with clearly separated lists, but I think
that just merging everything into openembedded-devel would be the
approach that serves all best, as everybody has his own separation
line anyway.

   Detlef

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Paul Menzel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1279 bytes --]

Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:05 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 08:25, Paul Menzel wrote:

> > > it would be great if we could join the lists oe-devel and oe-core again.
> > > As far as I know the only reason the list oe-core was created was to
> > > discuss the initial setup and the creation of oe-core. Now that it has
> > > been setup I do not see any reason to have two separate lists.
> > >
> > > I suggest to abandon/archive openembedded-core and use
> > > openembedded-devel.
> > 
> > I fully support this merge.
> 
> I'm not so sure rushing into this is a great idea.

I interpret your answer that the merge is planned. What is the right
time then?

> Speaking as someone who has problems trying to figure out where
> patches are intended for

Also now you have to decide to what list to send them to. Now you just
add a prefix/tag as is done on oe-devel already to differentiate between
oe.dev and meta-oe.

> and who tracks whether they've been applied,

Well, the list is not a patch tracker. The patch queue is [1].

> I do find the split useful...

Hmm, could you please elaborate?


Thanks,

Paul


[1] http://patches.openembedded.org/

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Richard Purdie]

On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:05 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 08:25, Paul Menzel wrote:
> 
> > > > it would be great if we could join the lists oe-devel and oe-core again.
> > > > As far as I know the only reason the list oe-core was created was to
> > > > discuss the initial setup and the creation of oe-core. Now that it has
> > > > been setup I do not see any reason to have two separate lists.
> > > >
> > > > I suggest to abandon/archive openembedded-core and use
> > > > openembedded-devel.
> > > 
> > > I fully support this merge.
> > 
> > I'm not so sure rushing into this is a great idea.
> 
> I interpret your answer that the merge is planned. What is the right
> time then?

Not planned, it has been talked about, particularly by the TSC members.

> > Speaking as someone who has problems trying to figure out where
> > patches are intended for
> 
> Also now you have to decide to what list to send them to. Now you just
> add a prefix/tag as is done on oe-devel already to differentiate between
> oe.dev and meta-oe.

Well, its relatively simple to decide if an email is appropriate for
oe-core or not.

Sure we could start asking people to use tags/prefixes but I fail to see
the advantage of putting more email in one place when a reasonable and
logical separate exists which actively helps people.

> > and who tracks whether they've been applied,
> 
> Well, the list is not a patch tracker. The patch queue is [1].

For various reasons its not how I track patches for OE-Core.

> > I do find the split useful...
> 
> Hmm, could you please elaborate?

We all try to find ways to make our workflows more efficient and to do
the best job we can at the things we attempt. The mailing list
separation actively helps me notice the most important things I need to
deal with. Now yes, I could use mail filters, I could do a variety of
things. Even with those I believe my response to various things would be
adversely impacted if we do merge the lists as with the best will in the
world, people sometimes don't do things like tags/prefixes/whatever and
its easier for anyone new to OE to get confused.

Cheers,

Richard

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Otavio Salvador]

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 14:00, Richard Purdie <rpurdie@rpsys.net> wrote:
...
>> Hmm, could you please elaborate?
>
> We all try to find ways to make our workflows more efficient and to do
> the best job we can at the things we attempt. The mailing list
> separation actively helps me notice the most important things I need to
> deal with. Now yes, I could use mail filters, I could do a variety of
> things. Even with those I believe my response to various things would be
> adversely impacted if we do merge the lists as with the best will in the
> world, people sometimes don't do things like tags/prefixes/whatever and
> its easier for anyone new to OE to get confused.

That is easy to fix since someone might warn the user for how to send
this properly. About new users, having multiple mailing lists just
makes the problem worse since the user won't know which mailing list
to use. So having a single place to ask is much better IMO.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
E-mail: otavio@ossystems.com.br  http://www.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854              http://projetos.ossystems.com.br

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Paul Menzel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4122 bytes --]

Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 18:00 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> > > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:05 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 08:25, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > 
> > > > > it would be great if we could join the lists oe-devel and oe-core again.
> > > > > As far as I know the only reason the list oe-core was created was to
> > > > > discuss the initial setup and the creation of oe-core. Now that it has
> > > > > been setup I do not see any reason to have two separate lists.
> > > > >
> > > > > I suggest to abandon/archive openembedded-core and use
> > > > > openembedded-devel.
> > > > 
> > > > I fully support this merge.
> > > 
> > > I'm not so sure rushing into this is a great idea.
> > 
> > I interpret your answer that the merge is planned. What is the right
> > time then?
> 
> Not planned, it has been talked about, particularly by the TSC members.

Well, and what is the current position of the TSC members?

> > > Speaking as someone who has problems trying to figure out where
> > > patches are intended for
> > 
> > Also now you have to decide to what list to send them to. Now you just
> > add a prefix/tag as is done on oe-devel already to differentiate between
> > oe.dev and meta-oe.
> 
> Well, its relatively simple to decide if an email is appropriate for
> oe-core or not.

I was just talking about patches and those can easily be prefixed.

> Sure we could start asking people to use tags/prefixes but I fail to see
> the advantage of putting more email in one place when a reasonable and
> logical separate exists which actively helps people.
> 
> > > and who tracks whether they've been applied,
> > 
> > Well, the list is not a patch tracker. The patch queue is [1].
> 
> For various reasons its not how I track patches for OE-Core.

It is kind of hard for me to understand your point of view, when your
answers are that short. How do you track patches? Somebody sends it to
the list and you review and apply or pull it when it is good enough.
What would change when the lists merge?

> > > I do find the split useful...
> > 
> > Hmm, could you please elaborate?
> 
> We all try to find ways to make our workflows more efficient and to do
> the best job we can at the things we attempt. The mailing list
> separation actively helps me notice the most important things I need to
> deal with.

How do you notice it now? Just skimming the subject line I guess?

> Now yes, I could use mail filters, I could do a variety of
> things. Even with those I believe my response to various things would be
> adversely impacted if we do merge the lists as with the best will in the
> world, people sometimes don't do things like tags/prefixes/whatever and
> its easier for anyone new to OE to get confused.

In my opinion reading oe-devel and being on IRC anyone gets confused
right now because of all the different layers and so on. It would be a
lot easier for beginners if there was just one list.

And looking at the overview for lists in our Wiki [1], oe-devel is the
list for general discussions.

Skimming through the archive of oe-core [2][3] I have the impression
that mostly developers are sending patches to the list and that user
questions are more presented to oe-devel. Therefore in my opinion you
folks would benefit from merge too by seeing what the users actually
desire or what problems they hit.

As a wrote earlier already, I have the *impression* that you lost a lot
of former OE developers during the transition and all these different
places where discussions are going on is in my opinion one reason for
this.

I hope on Monday more folks will voice their opinion to get a better
expression.


Thanks,

Paul


[1] http://openembedded.org/index.php/Mailing_lists
[2] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2011-September/thread.html
[3] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2011-August/thread.html

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Andreas Müller]

On Friday, September 02, 2011 10:18:23 PM Paul Menzel wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 18:00 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > > Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> > > > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:05 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 08:25, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > > > > > it would be great if we could join the lists oe-devel and oe-core
> > > > > > again. As far as I know the only reason the list oe-core was
> > > > > > created was to discuss the initial setup and the creation of
> > > > > > oe-core. Now that it has been setup I do not see any reason to
> > > > > > have two separate lists.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I suggest to abandon/archive openembedded-core and use
> > > > > > openembedded-devel.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I fully support this merge.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not so sure rushing into this is a great idea.
> > > 
> > > I interpret your answer that the merge is planned. What is the right
> > > time then?
> > 
> > Not planned, it has been talked about, particularly by the TSC members.
> 
> Well, and what is the current position of the TSC members?
> 
> > > > Speaking as someone who has problems trying to figure out where
> > > > patches are intended for
> > > 
> > > Also now you have to decide to what list to send them to. Now you just
> > > add a prefix/tag as is done on oe-devel already to differentiate
> > > between oe.dev and meta-oe.
> > 
> > Well, its relatively simple to decide if an email is appropriate for
> > oe-core or not.
> 
> I was just talking about patches and those can easily be prefixed.
> 
> > Sure we could start asking people to use tags/prefixes but I fail to see
> > the advantage of putting more email in one place when a reasonable and
> > logical separate exists which actively helps people.
> > 
> > > > and who tracks whether they've been applied,
> > > 
> > > Well, the list is not a patch tracker. The patch queue is [1].
> > 
> > For various reasons its not how I track patches for OE-Core.
> 
> It is kind of hard for me to understand your point of view, when your
> answers are that short. How do you track patches? Somebody sends it to
> the list and you review and apply or pull it when it is good enough.
> What would change when the lists merge?
> 
> > > > I do find the split useful...
> > > 
> > > Hmm, could you please elaborate?
> > 
> > We all try to find ways to make our workflows more efficient and to do
> > the best job we can at the things we attempt. The mailing list
> > separation actively helps me notice the most important things I need to
> > deal with.
> 
> How do you notice it now? Just skimming the subject line I guess?
> 
> > Now yes, I could use mail filters, I could do a variety of
> > things. Even with those I believe my response to various things would be
> > adversely impacted if we do merge the lists as with the best will in the
> > world, people sometimes don't do things like tags/prefixes/whatever and
> > its easier for anyone new to OE to get confused.
> 
> In my opinion reading oe-devel and being on IRC anyone gets confused
> right now because of all the different layers and so on. It would be a
> lot easier for beginners if there was just one list.
> 
> And looking at the overview for lists in our Wiki [1], oe-devel is the
> list for general discussions.
> 
> Skimming through the archive of oe-core [2][3] I have the impression
> that mostly developers are sending patches to the list and that user
> questions are more presented to oe-devel. Therefore in my opinion you
> folks would benefit from merge too by seeing what the users actually
> desire or what problems they hit.
> 
> As a wrote earlier already, I have the *impression* that you lost a lot
> of former OE developers during the transition and all these different
> places where discussions are going on is in my opinion one reason for
> this.
Maybe more (new) developers are afraid of effort causing style-guide-crusaders 
not willing to subscribe more than one mailing list...
> 
> I hope on Monday more folks will voice their opinion to get a better
> expression.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> [1] http://openembedded.org/index.php/Mailing_lists
> [2]
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2011-September/thre
> ad.html [3]
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2011-August/thread.
> html

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Phil Blundell]

On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> > I do find the split useful...
> 
> Hmm, could you please elaborate?

Not that I'm Richard, but I do find the split useful as well.
Personally I am much less interested in the traffic on the oe-devel list
and I often ignore that one; I've been somewhat tempted to just
unsubscribe altogether since there doesn't appear to be all that much of
value (to me) going on there.  Merging the two lists would make it
harder for me to pick out the oe-core parts that I'm interested in and,
from my point of view at least, it wouldn't bring any benefits.

p.

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Andreas Müller]

On Friday, September 02, 2011 08:48:38 PM Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> > > I do find the split useful...
> > 
> > Hmm, could you please elaborate?
> 
> Not that I'm Richard, but I do find the split useful as well.
> Personally I am much less interested in the traffic on the oe-devel list
> and I often ignore that one; I've been somewhat tempted to just
> unsubscribe altogether since there doesn't appear to be all that much of
> value (to me) going on there.  
I would even prefer having additional meta-oe list separated from oe-dev.
> Merging the two lists would make it
> harder for me to pick out the oe-core parts that I'm interested in and,
> from my point of view at least, it wouldn't bring any benefits.
> 
> p.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel

Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Op 02-09-11 21:29, Andreas Müller schreef:
> On Friday, September 02, 2011 08:48:38 PM Phil Blundell wrote:
>> On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
>>> Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
>>>> I do find the split useful...
>>> 
>>> Hmm, could you please elaborate?
>> 
>> Not that I'm Richard, but I do find the split useful as well. 
>> Personally I am much less interested in the traffic on the oe-devel
>> list and I often ignore that one; I've been somewhat tempted to just 
>> unsubscribe altogether since there doesn't appear to be all that much
>> of value (to me) going on there.

> I would even prefer having additional meta-oe list separated from
> oe-dev.

If there's enough need for it, that can get arranged.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFOYUvwMkyGM64RGpERAkFNAJ47upzL7p3FWx0WmKfRZ1GmHxsuhQCfbNDs
vlLNzXOZ1gRVxQ/WRTIjbNU=
=Lmil
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Paul Menzel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1016 bytes --]

Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 23:34 +0200 schrieb Koen Kooi:
> Op 02-09-11 21:29, Andreas Müller schreef:
> > On Friday, September 02, 2011 08:48:38 PM Phil Blundell wrote:
> >> On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> >>> Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> >>>> I do find the split useful...
> >>> 
> >>> Hmm, could you please elaborate?
> >> 
> >> Not that I'm Richard, but I do find the split useful as well. 
> >> Personally I am much less interested in the traffic on the oe-devel
> >> list and I often ignore that one; I've been somewhat tempted to just 
> >> unsubscribe altogether since there doesn't appear to be all that much
> >> of value (to me) going on there.
> 
> > I would even prefer having additional meta-oe list separated from
> > oe-dev.
> 
> If there's enough need for it, that can get arranged.

Why should that be needed? Maybe proposals could be explained and backed
up with arguments for a discussion.


Thanks,

Paul

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Martin Jansa]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1443 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 11:49:10PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 23:34 +0200 schrieb Koen Kooi:
> > Op 02-09-11 21:29, Andreas Müller schreef:
> > > On Friday, September 02, 2011 08:48:38 PM Phil Blundell wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 17:21 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > >>> Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 14:19 +0100 schrieb Richard Purdie:
> > >>>> I do find the split useful...
> > >>> 
> > >>> Hmm, could you please elaborate?
> > >> 
> > >> Not that I'm Richard, but I do find the split useful as well. 
> > >> Personally I am much less interested in the traffic on the oe-devel
> > >> list and I often ignore that one; I've been somewhat tempted to just 
> > >> unsubscribe altogether since there doesn't appear to be all that much
> > >> of value (to me) going on there.
> > 
> > > I would even prefer having additional meta-oe list separated from
> > > oe-dev.
> > 
> > If there's enough need for it, that can get arranged.
> 
> Why should that be needed? Maybe proposals could be explained and backed
> up with arguments for a discussion.

I don't care if it's all in one list or N > 2 separate lists because
I'll be subscribed to all and filter will merge all those e-mails to one
folder anyways..

But I see your point that it's harder to decide to which list(s) someone
should send his question..

Regards,

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.

[Eric Bénard]

Le 02/09/2011 23:49, Paul Menzel a écrit :
> Am Freitag, den 02.09.2011, 23:34 +0200 schrieb Koen Kooi:
>> Op 02-09-11 21:29, Andreas Müller schreef:
>>> I would even prefer having additional meta-oe list separated from
>>> oe-dev.
>>
>> If there's enough need for it, that can get arranged.
>
> Why should that be needed? Maybe proposals could be explained and backed up
> with arguments for a discussion.
>
having a list for legacy oe and a list for new oe seems reasonnable : that's
not the same thing and legacy oe development is no more active (and activity 
on the mailing list doesn't really show that oe legacy is dead).

And when a user has understood were to find layers, how to work with all these
layers, where are the recipes he needs in all the layers' directory tree, what 
is the logic (or its absence) to classify recipes, how to customize them to 
its need, and how to find in all that mess what broke something which was 
working before the last pull, I'm sure he has the knowledge to subscribe to 
the list of the layers he is using in order to follow their development ;-)

Eric