[yocto] Minutes: Yocto Project Technical Team Meeting - Tuesday, June 7, 2016 8:00 AM US Pacific Time

[akuster808]

On 8/3/16 6:19 AM, Philip Balister wrote:
>
> On 08/02/2016 11:23 AM, Jolley, Stephen K wrote:
>> Attendees: Saul, David Wolfe, Joshua, Belen, Ross, Mark, Bill
>>  
> ....
>
>>         Poky - LTS/LTM Branch
>>         - Community Driven
>>         - 2 Years
>>         - Companies continue to push on older branches that they are
>> interested in.
>>         - Most patches would be in Oe-Core meta-data
> This kind of jumped out at me. Can anyone explain why the Yocto Project
> needs an LTS version of the reference distribution?

I am glad you asked.

In order for a Yocto Member to be Yocto Compatible, any changes made to
Bitbake or OE-core have to be submitted to the mailing list. If I have
to submit changes then is makes sense that there be a central place like
a repo where these changes can live. We have this for the first year.
MontaVista and I am sure other Member's support products beyond the
first year.  It seems natural to have a process in place to continue the
behavior and work Yocto Members are required to perform to maintain
Yocto compatibility. Or are you saying Yocto Compatible is only good for
1 year?

It not so much having an LTS Poky as much as having LTS branches for OE
core and bitbake. This means Poky would not have to be kept updated nor
would the Yocto Project need to build or QA the LTS branches.

As I see it, an LTS branch would only exist if there is a need and is
supported by the ones who desire the LTS branch.  I am sure there will
be some prerequisites in doing this.  I don't see this as a bad thing
for the community or the Project.

regards,
Armin



>
> Philip
>
>
>> * Team Sharing - 10 min
>>  RP has branch with multi-config in parallel
>>   - fixes various other tools
>>   - Distributed builds in 2.2 is unlikely due to resource constraits
>>
>> Thanks,
>>  
>> Sau!
>>