[meta-freescale] Please review the proposal of FSL Yocto layers reorg

[Otavio Salvador]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 6:21 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882
<B29882 at freescale.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Luo Zhenhua-B19537
> <B19537 at freescale.com> wrote:
>> Hello Otavio and all,
>>
>> The FSL Yocto layers reorg proposal is attached, can you please take a look?
>> Any comment and suggestion is welcome and appreciated.
>>
>
> 1) Don't cross post to internal and external mailing lists.
>
> 2) I still don't really see the point in renaming from meta-fsl-ppc ->
> meta-fsl-qoriq as well as meta-fsl-arm to meta-fsl-imx. But, I wonder
> what others think about this. It seems like unneeded changes that will
> just cause confusion. Why not just put vybird in meta-fsl-arm?

I support this idea and it'd make users' life much easier.

> 3) I think we should delay the creation of some of these layers until
> we really have packages that are duplicated between two layers (e.g.
> meta-layerscape can wait until we have a recipe that is needed for
> both ARM and PPC and is not upstream in another layer)

Personally I think it won't happen often as usually it'll not be a BSP
package that will fit in this set so it'll end in meta-virtualization
or meta-networking eventually.

> 4) I think we need some more info about the "unifed" layer. I don't
> think it needs to exist yet, but maybe others would like to see it.
> Personally, I think it can be created automatically much like poky is
> now.

As I said, I fear it adding more confusing than solving. It might
making users wonder which layer he/she will use and don't know exactly
the difference between the merged layer and the individual ones.

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