On 2/3/20 1:38 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sun, Feb 02, 2020 at 11:48:49PM +0000, Richard Purdie wrote: >> On Mon, 2020-02-03 at 01:13 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: >> ... >>> 2. Branch change when changing to community maintainance would be bad >>> >>> This would silently break any automated setup that follows a stable >>> branch for getting security updates. >> This I disagree with, quite strongly. >> >> When something moves to community support, it means the testing and >> quality could change. > Regarding testing, the only documented difference between LTS branches > and community branches is "Automated testing is on a best effort basis".
That is the same difference of Stable branches and Community supported. What is not noted is the Build configurations along with Automated Testing it the unknown for Community support. > > Regarding other quality aspects, I do not see why the community branch > patch review and merging process has to be different from the normal > stable process. Stable has to pass builds on the AB and the tests included. Dot releases include a formal QA run. Community is unknown. - Armin >> I believe at such a point people need to actively >> decide whether its for them or not. > I believe this is the same "Do I need security fixes?" question people > already had to answer when deciding whether to use a point release or > following the stable branch. > >> ... >>> 4. It is hard to contribute to a stable series (both LTS and non-LTS) >>> >>> Apart from submitting patches, it is hard to find ways to contribute >>> to stable series when you are not a big company that can afford a >>> huge contribution. >>> >>> How could an individual or small company contribute specifically >>> to something like "5 years security support for Yocto 3.1"? >>> The 6 digit resource commitment of paying 50% of the time of a >>> qualified person is obvious. It is less clear how Yocto would be able >>> to accept and use a € 10k contribution. >> Yocto exists to allow people to pool together and do things together >> when they might not otherwise have been able to. A single €10k >> contribution can do so much, if you have 10 of them, you can suddenly >> do an awful lot more or achieve something you otherwise couldn't! >> >> YP does things which need help from people, it also does things which >> need money. We take very gratefully take whatever contributions we can >> in whatever form they come in. > It is not obvious which legal entity would do the actual pooling of the > money for the intended purpose. > Would the Linux Foundation pay a YP LTS maintainer and send invoices > for contributions to the salary? > What kind of recognition can YP offer to contributors that are not > Linux Foundation members? > >> ... >> If you have ideas for how we could better accept >> contributions, or recognise them I'd be interested to understand them. >> ... > Debian LTS has a setup where the minimal annual contribution is € 255, > and € 1020 per year gets your company logo on the sponsorship page.[1] > The rest is just a standard "get invoice and make SEPA payment". > > At these financial amounts and level of recognition it is easier to > convince a customer or employer that a contribution is beneficial. > > I would be surprised if anything like this would be easy to setup > for YP. > >> Cheers, >> >> Richard > cu > Adrian > > [1] https://www.freexian.com/services/debian-lts.html > _______________________________________________ > Openembedded-architecture mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-architecture _______________________________________________ Openembedded-architecture mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-architecture
