On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 11:39 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 09:41 +0100, Burton, Ross wrote: > > As everyone who's used it can attest, Web (the optional browser in > > Sato) is pretty rough. Part of my plans about replacing Sato with a > > leaner environment involves replacing it with Midori, and if there > > isn't any disagreements I'll work on a submission to merge Midori into > > Sato now for everyone who expects the Sato web browser to be useful. > > Replacing Web with Midori in Sato probably is a fine idea from the point > of view of those folks who want to use Sato per se. As far as oe-core > is concerned, the point of having Sato included is apparently for > testability and it's not entirely obvious that much extra test coverage > would be gained by merging Midori. > > Indeed, it's not totally clear that having WebKit in meta-sato is really > justified by the test coverage it brings. I think WebKit itself might > be a reasonable candidate for inclusion in oe-core proper, but the > current situation of having a slightly half-baked recipe in meta-sato is > not very satisfactory. > > However... > > >This will involve pulling a few projects from meta-oe to oe-core: > >ca-certificates, python-docutils and vala specifically (although its > >possible that we can drop the vala dependency). > > ... all three of those seem like reasonable enough things to have in > oe-core. Personally I would quite like to see Vala in there. So, from > that point of view, I don't have any objection to your proposal. > > But, that said, I do still think that there is going to be some > inevitable tension between the desire to make Sato useful in itself and > the desire to have a test environment for oe-core which doesn't add too > many extra dependencies. So in the longer term I continue to feel that > Sato should probably go away into its own layer (or, at least, a layer > that isn't oe-core) and oe-core itself should gain a dedicated test > suite. Anybody who wanted to go on using Sato to exercise oe-core would > obviously be free to do so even if it was in some other layer.
I think the intent which perhaps isn't being put clearly is that we're intending to "morph" sato into a kind of test suite of OE-Core (whether anything is still "sato" in the end remains to be seen). We appreciate it needs to be minimal yet have good coverage of the various libs/apis. Some things will just get moved (eds/pimlico) out, some will go into the core (e.g. webkit) and so on. If the webkit recipe is half baked, lets fully bake it as I believe in doing things properly if you do them at all (which is why web-sato needs to go). The changes won't happen overnight but I think Ross' proposal for sorting the browser as a first step is a good one as part of the larger plan. Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
