[yocto-ab] Yocto Project branding registrations

[Ricci, Davide]

> My recommendation is therefore we suggest Koen waits for 1.3 and then
> Angstrom can comply with that. Alternatively, there could be significant
> backporting to denzil, or Angstrom would remove the meta-oe to an
> optional dependency but I can't see either of these happening.

This is the right call.

Thanks

D

________________________________________
From: yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org [yocto-ab-bounces at yoctoproject.org] on behalf of Richard Purdie [richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 2:13 AM
To: Osier-mixon, Jeffrey
Cc: yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
Subject: Re: [yocto-ab] Yocto Project branding registrations

On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 11:03 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 14:18 -0700, Osier-mixon, Jeffrey wrote:
> > Yocto Project Compatible:
> > - The Angstrom Distribution (Koen Kooi)
> >
> > This request has created some interesting discussions among the
> > technical team that are ongoing. I propose we delay the vote for a
> > while longer while those issues are resolved.
>
> In the case of Angstrom, this basically stands as previously discussed.
> It has a requirement on the meta-openembedded and the denzil version of
> this is not compliant due to the mixture of recipes and policy. In
> master, meta-systemd has been split out and therefore the 1.3 release of
> angstrom/meta-openembedded should comply.
>
> My recommendation is therefore we suggest Koen waits for 1.3 and then
> Angstrom can comply with that. Alternatively, there could be significant
> backporting to denzil, or Angstrom would remove the meta-oe to an
> optional dependency but I can't see either of these happening.
>
> There are some questions raised about the compliance of meta-yocto. That
> has been cleaved into two pieces (meta-yocto for distro like pieces and
> meta-yocto-bsp for the hardware support). This turned out to be wanted
> by a variety of the community anyway and actually shows the compliance
> criteria making a lot of sense.
>
> Koen did ask me what was going on so I've explained what was been
> discussed and my recommendation (along with the meta-yocto issues).
> Obviously the board needs to make a decision which we can then pass on
> officially to Koen.

I'm being deafened by the silence. I'm therefore going to assume this
means everyone agrees with my recommendation and effectively gives it a
"yes" vote unless people shout within the next 48 hours.

Cheers,

Richard


_______________________________________________
yocto-ab mailing list
yocto-ab at yoctoproject.org
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto-ab