On Fri, 2022-09-09 at 10:42 +0200, Konrad Weihmann wrote: > A general remark from my side about this patch is that this limitation > isn't mentioned in the documentation at all [1]. > I would have been in favor of just dropping this piece of code, esp as > the check wasn't run for years now - but here we are with another > undocumented and breaking change (at least for me, as the template confs > in my projects weren't located under templates, until everything fell > apart in CI over night)
The tone of what you've written here isn't great but let me comment. The project can and will make changes and try to improve, it has to. Some of these changes will break things. We usually try our best to minimise disruption but change is what happens on the development branch. We usually do a reasonable job of documenting things as part of the release notes and the migration guide but this isn't in a release yet. We do have LTS branches and we are not in the habit of pushing breaking changes to those. For reference, I would ideally love to have a team of engineers I could work with to make sure all changes had strong migration code and nothing every broke. We have to manage with what we have. If you expect your CI never to break running against master, that is not a realistic expectation. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#170480): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/170480 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/93502783/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
