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

[Luo Zhenhua-B19537]

Hello all,

Thanks a lot for the feedback.

I will incorporate those information into the FSL Yocto reorg documentation. 


Best Regards,

Zhenhua


> -----Original Message-----
> From: meta-freescale-bounces at yoctoproject.org [mailto:meta-freescale-
> bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Bob Cochran
> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 7:30 AM
> To: McClintock Matthew-B29882
> Cc: meta-freescale at yoctoproject.org; Otavio Salvador;
> yocto at linux.freescale.net
> Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] Please review the proposal of FSL Yocto
> layers reorg
> 
> On 02/28/2013 01:59 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com> wrote:
> >> Le Thu, 28 Feb 2013 16:52:02 +0000,
> >> McClintock Matthew-B29882 <B29882 at freescale.com> a écrit :
> >>> I think you misinterpreted the intent of my statement, the goal is
> >>> to provide the best support we can for the open source versions and
> >>> get feedback as well. However, specifically stating what will be
> >>> done for each release, branch, layer, etc is not something that is a
> >>> deliverable on the open source end and I don't see it happening soon.
> >>> That being said, there is no malicious intent and supporting
> >>> upstream and making it work as well as possible is the ultimate goal
> >>> so our SDK release requires less effort and work.
> >>>
> >> I may have misinterpreted your statement but it seems you make a
> >> difference between the open source version and the SDK release :
> >> isn't that roughly the same thing when we talk of meta-fsl-* where
> >> the SDK release can be seen as a snapshots of the opensource stable
> >> branch at the date of the release ? If not what are the differences ?
> >
> > They *should* be the same. But for SDK releases sometimes we skip
> > entire Yocto releases (e.g. danny). SDK versions *may* contain
> > slightly different versions. This comes into play more with oe-core
> > where we don't have official control and we need to include a specific
> > fix for the SDK. Layers themselves tend to have less reason to deviate
> > from the upstream versions since we control both sides so they
> > *should* be the same.
> 
> 
> Thanks Matthew. It's great that you are explaining things to us, but all
> this information will become stale in a matter of weeks or even days.  I
> believe we need Zhenhua's layers document to describe what we have been
> discussing regarding policies on how the SDK branches will be maintained,
> where to pull the latest stable SDK patches from the various servers, and
> how the same named trees are managed on the different servers.
> 
> If nothing can be promised, then at least state it in the document rather
> than gloss over it.
> 
> Also, I hope the layers organization document will be posted on an FSL
> site and become maintained documentation or perhaps a Wiki.
> 
> 
> >
> >> Also, do you plan to sync the public accessible git tree only when you
> >> do a release or will they get the patches in "realtime" ?
> >
> > These should go in real time esp. if we are working on the current
> > release (e.g. master branch). Right now we are still using denzil
> > until the May release which will be based on what is now master.
> >
> > -M
> > _______________________________________________
> > meta-freescale mailing list
> > meta-freescale at yoctoproject.org
> > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> meta-freescale mailing list
> meta-freescale at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale