[yocto-ab] Terminology - Some draft definitions

[Philip Balister]

On 05/16/2011 11:20 AM, Cherry, John wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto-ab-
>> bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Mark Orvek
>> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 7:20 AM
>> To: Richard Purdie; Ed Nash
>> Cc: yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
>> Subject: Re: [yocto-ab] Terminology - Some draft definitions
>>
>>>> "industry quality"? How does this differ from "commercial quality"?
>>>
>>> I suspect commercial quality would be better :)
>>
>> I suggest we avoid terms that will cause conflict with the member
>> companies.  How about "improved quality tools for embedded system
>> developers"?
>>
>> Mark
>

Can we combine Richard's description of the Yocto Project:

Yocto Project - The overall project aiming to make Linux on "embedded"
platforms succeed by providing industry-quality tooling for developers
and making Linux easier to use in "embedded" products. It's scope
includes anything that can further that objective.

With Mark's thoughts:

> Totally agree with Mark here.  Yocto is about continuously integrated/tested tools, metadata, and core embedded SW definitions that serve as the foundation for industry wide development environments and product offerings.   As soon as Yocto becomes a "commercial" entity, broad member involvement will cease.

I'd like to drop the quality phrase (the word suffers from overuse).


Philip

>
> John
>
>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org
>> [mailto:yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Richard Purdie
>> Sent: Monday, May 16, 2011 6:49 AM
>> To: Ed Nash
>> Cc: yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
>> Subject: Re: [yocto-ab] Terminology - Some draft definitions
>>
>> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 09:27 -0400, Ed Nash wrote:
>>> On 05/16/2011 07:50 AM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>>> In the last steering group meeting I promised to write something
>> down
>> about what
>>>> some of the words we use mean, particularly what OE, Poky and Yocto
>> all
>>>> mean. What follows is a first draft style start at this:
>>>
>>> Thanks Richard for getting this started.
>>>
>>>> Yocto Project - The overall project aiming to make Linux on
>> "embedded"
>>>> platforms succeed by providing industry-quality tooling for
>> developers
>>>
>>> "industry quality"? How does this differ from "commercial quality"?
>>
>> I suspect commercial quality would be better :)
>>
>>>> and making Linux easier to use in "embedded" products. It's scope
>>>> includes anything that can further that objective.
>>>
>>> cool.
>>>
>>>> OpenEmbedded - An architecture and build system technology in the
>> form
>>>> of an open source project.
>>>
>>> What does "architecture" apply to? What software components are
>>> compliant with this architecture? Does this represent choices I have
>> to
>>> make in my product design? Oh wait, reading below "OpenEmbedded
>> Core",
>>> it sounds like architecture means "how you write a recipe" - correct?
>>
>> Yes, the architecture refers to the metadata format and the process by
>> which the system takes than and produces the end result.
>>
>>>> Bitbake - The tool used by OpenEmbedded to parse the metadata and
>>>> execute tasks
>>>
>>> Crystal clear! :)
>>>
>>>> OpenEmbedded Core - A core set of metadata which most embedded
>> style
>>>> systems commonly need and conforms to the OpenEmbedded
>> architecture.
>>>> Shared by Yocto and OpenEmbedded and has an aim of achieving the
>> highest
>>>> metadata quality at the expense of some additional process.
>>>
>>> "process"? Can you give an example.
>>
>> We're using a pull model with a clear submission process and that
>> changes need to be of a certain quality (e.g. changes shouldn't break
>> QA
>> tests or they ultimately would get backed out).
>>
>>>> Meta-OpenEmbedded - Metadata for less commonly used software
>> components
>>>> of embedded systems. Has different submission and quality
>> objectives.
>>>
>>> I follow, though it begs the question what are the submission and
>>> quality objectives?
>>
>> Ensuring recent versions are used, that they build/run for all core CPU
>> architectures, that the recipes are cleanly and clearly written,
>> patches
>> clearly documented and so on. The submission part of this is because
>> meta-oe might be under a different less stringent process to that of
>> OE-Core.
>>
>>>> Poky - A vetted and QA'd combination of bitbake, OpenEmbedded-Core,
>>>> documentation, some reference board support and any needed glue to
>>>> provide support for a defined architecture list. It is supplied in
>> a
>>>> pre-integrated package which has known QA tests and results for its
>>>> releases which provide a stable base people can build upon. Its
>> provided
>>>> and maintained by the Yocto project.
>>>
>>> Frankly, this sounds like a great definition for the yocto project!
>>
>> There is more to the yocto project than this. There are several other
>> components such as:
>>
>> * Kernel Tooling
>> * Pseudo
>> * Swabber
>> * ADT IDE plugins (Eclipse)
>> * Image Creator UI
>>
>> and Poky is just one component part of this list, albeit a significant
>> one. How we better communicate this I don't know but I still believe we
>> need a name for the "build system" component of Yocto. As soon as we
>> think otherwise we limit ourselves just to being about a build system
>> and miss a key part of what we're trying to do which is develop a *set*
>> of embedded tools, not just the build system.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto-ab mailing list
>> yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto-ab mailing list
>> yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab
> _______________________________________________
> yocto-ab mailing list
> yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab
>