On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 11:29 -0700, ext Kok, Auke-jan H wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 5:09 AM, Ramez Hanna <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 10:52 +0200, ext Dominig ar Foll wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> those who have discussed with me during the MeeGo Conference in San > >> Francisco, know that I have started a small project to create a Light > >> version of OBS. > >> > >> The goal of the project is to ease the access to OBS for embedded > >> developers and initial investigation team which have to select an > >> embedded OS, by creating a tool which follows their traditional > >> development process (working locally in chroot) but keeps the > >> compatibility with the OBS. > >> > >> Some of the module that we are planning could potentially be of interest > >> for the real OBS (called Full OBS in my spec). In particular the the > >> automatic creation of patch files from a modified chroot and the UI for > >> MIC2 could become generic features. All created new code will be GPL2. > >> > >> Your feedback is welcome. All discussion will take place on the MeeGo > >> distribution-tools mailing list. > >> > >> http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-distribution-tools > >> > >> The file is on the MeeGo Wiki. > >> > >> http://wiki.meego.com/images/SpecOBSLight-1_V-0-6.pdf > >> > > I also got similar (if not exactly) requirements from some of our > > internal developers, I have drafted a wiki page describing the reasons > > we think we need a different tool than just osc/obs and some details of > > the proposed implementation > > I would like to get more feedback to be able to make this tool usefull > > form more than just our internal developers > > > > Dominig I think we can work together on something here, our approach is > > much simpler than the one you propose > > maybe we can find some middle ground. > > can you state *why*, I asked before but I never got a reply. Please, > take some time to explain: > > - Why is current OBS insufficient for your development model? Would > running another instance of OBS not suffice? according to developers, they see OBS as a perfect system to deliver for integration cycles, but slow for hack,build,test cycles prior to integrating into product > > - Why can't the current OBS software be enhanced to better provide the > needed features? in my solution we are trying to reuse osc/obs tools/apis to solve it not reimplement OBS > > Given that you and Dominig both state "it's needed", it should be > trivial to answer these questions. the way obs builds has a few slowing down points, of these are 1. you need to archive, then push it to obs, then obs would unpack to start building 2. everytime it biulds it starts from scratch, while if you oatch and rerun make, you would spare yourself some time in building
and osc/obs allows you to build locally and reusing chroots yes but you need to do things manually, while as dominig states in his document that embeded developers are more comfortable with local build tools and it seems also that th espeed factor is very important for some QT developers > > Auke -- Ramez Hanna <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines
