Hello all, Thanks a lot for the feedback.
I will incorporate those information into the FSL Yocto reorg documentation. Best Regards, Zhenhua > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:meta-freescale- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Bob Cochran > Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 7:30 AM > To: McClintock Matthew-B29882 > Cc: [email protected]; Otavio Salvador; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] Please review the proposal of FSL Yocto > layers reorg > > On 02/28/2013 01:59 PM, McClintock Matthew-B29882 wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Eric Bénard <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Le Thu, 28 Feb 2013 16:52:02 +0000, > >> McClintock Matthew-B29882 <[email protected]> a écrit : > >>> I think you misinterpreted the intent of my statement, the goal is > >>> to provide the best support we can for the open source versions and > >>> get feedback as well. However, specifically stating what will be > >>> done for each release, branch, layer, etc is not something that is a > >>> deliverable on the open source end and I don't see it happening soon. > >>> That being said, there is no malicious intent and supporting > >>> upstream and making it work as well as possible is the ultimate goal > >>> so our SDK release requires less effort and work. > >>> > >> I may have misinterpreted your statement but it seems you make a > >> difference between the open source version and the SDK release : > >> isn't that roughly the same thing when we talk of meta-fsl-* where > >> the SDK release can be seen as a snapshots of the opensource stable > >> branch at the date of the release ? If not what are the differences ? > > > > They *should* be the same. But for SDK releases sometimes we skip > > entire Yocto releases (e.g. danny). SDK versions *may* contain > > slightly different versions. This comes into play more with oe-core > > where we don't have official control and we need to include a specific > > fix for the SDK. Layers themselves tend to have less reason to deviate > > from the upstream versions since we control both sides so they > > *should* be the same. > > > Thanks Matthew. It's great that you are explaining things to us, but all > this information will become stale in a matter of weeks or even days. I > believe we need Zhenhua's layers document to describe what we have been > discussing regarding policies on how the SDK branches will be maintained, > where to pull the latest stable SDK patches from the various servers, and > how the same named trees are managed on the different servers. > > If nothing can be promised, then at least state it in the document rather > than gloss over it. > > Also, I hope the layers organization document will be posted on an FSL > site and become maintained documentation or perhaps a Wiki. > > > > > >> Also, do you plan to sync the public accessible git tree only when you > >> do a release or will they get the patches in "realtime" ? > > > > These should go in real time esp. if we are working on the current > > release (e.g. master branch). Right now we are still using denzil > > until the May release which will be based on what is now master. > > > > -M > > _______________________________________________ > > meta-freescale mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale > > > > _______________________________________________ > meta-freescale mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
