Hi Richard, On 10/05/13 23:18, Richard Purdie wrote: >> I am sure we all want a solid release so I am also sure Tomas wouldn't >> put experimental version of clutter near of release. > >>From what I read of Tomas' emails, I actually think his plans differ > from that as he finds that aspect of OE-Core frustrating.
I am no sure what 'aspect' of OE-Core you mean. If you mean the six-monthly releases, then you are reading my emails all wrong -- I am a firm believer. Regarding experimental releases -- I am not interested in them much myself, but with meta-clutter, we could, of course, have negative priority recipes for any interim developer snapshots, if that is what people need. But what I am looking for most are uptodate recipes for *stable* releases of clutter more or less as they happen. > I don't touch layers I don't maintain. If I did that, I would get hung, > drawn and quartered. Please at least think through things like this > before saying them :(. Can you imagine what you'd say to me if I pushed > commits to meta-fsl-arm? Just so we are clear, I am not trying to wrench clutter out of your control. For all I care, set up meta-clutter on g.yp.o, and put the current official maintainer of the clutter packages in oe-core in charge, but I don't think we can get a usable clutter support without a dedicated layer in the long run. Tomas -- http://sleepfive.com _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
