[meta-ti] meta-ti layer confusion

[Steffen Sledz]

On 25.04.2012 09:49, Steffen Sledz wrote:
> On 25.04.2012 08:19, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Op 25 apr. 2012, om 08:08 heeft Steffen Sledz het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> On 20.04.2012 15:47, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>> On 20.04.2012 15:20, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 09:20:47AM +0200, Steffen Sledz wrote:
>>>>>> Our company is working on a new TI DM814x based hardware currently.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a really hard job, because the TI linux support is not really "optimal". But that's not the primary cause for my message.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] lists two TI BSP layers [2],[3] each one claiming to be "The official OpenEmbedded/Yocto BSP layer for Texas Instruments platforms.".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A look into them shows that they are not identically. At the moment they differ in two commits ([3] is ahead of [2]). In the last days these differences where much bigger.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what is the intention for these two "offical" layers?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which one should we use? And why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW: Is anyone else out there working on a TI DM814x/DM816x hardware?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Steffen
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] <http://www.openembedded.org/wiki/LayerIndex>
>>>>>> [2] <http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-ti/>
>>>>>> [3] <https://github.com/Angstrom-distribution/meta-ti>
>>>>>
>>>>> They are the same. Or more appropriately, there is just one official meta-ti 
>>>>> layer, it's just mirrored in several places. The one on yoctoproject.org[2] is 
>>>>> considered the official mirror and that's what you should use. If you are 
>>>>> subscribed to this list, you should have seen Koen posting 2 patches for 
>>>>> review yesterday, which he has staged to his working copy on github[3] - 
>>>>> that's the difference in 2 commits. They shouldn't have been pushed to the 
>>>>> master branch though, until they are accepted...
>>>>
>>>> Why are they both listed in [1]?
>>>
>>> Any objections if i remove [3] from the LayerIndex?
>>
>> Yes
> 
> Which objections are these?
> 
> Why are they both *needed* in the LayerIndex?
> 
>>> After your comments i think that this one is just a kind of a staging area.
>>
>> And you're thinking wrong
> 
> So please explain this to us.
> 
> What we've seen in the last days is that there were commits in [3] which were not accepted at that moment. In the moment they got accepted they made their way to [2]. I would call this a staging area.

Ping!

-- 
DResearch Fahrzeugelektronik GmbH
Otto-Schmirgal-Str. 3, 10319 Berlin, Germany
Tel: +49 30 515932-237 mailto:sledz at dresearch-fe.de
Fax: +49 30 515932-299
Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Weber, Werner Mögle;
Amtsgericht Berlin Charlottenburg; HRB 130120 B;
Ust.-IDNr. DE273952058