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

[akuster808]

On 08/09/2016 12:36 PM, Khem Raj wrote:
> 
>> On Aug 3, 2016, at 8:17 AM, akuster808 <akuster808 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 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?
> 
> Dont we accept patches indefinitely as long as they keep coming?

Are far as I know we do.

> so in theory every branch is LTS for someone if one cares enough
> about compatibility with compliance programs.

Only if patches make it into a stable branch will they count, it makes
it more official. It is the overhead placed upon Richard and his minions
to take those patches and check them into the appropriate stable
branches. This drops off dramatically once a stable branch transitions
to EOL.


 However, LTS does provide
> a cushion for decision makers, practically, I see we are doing it
> ever since.
> 
>>
>> 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!
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto mailing list
>> yocto at yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto
>