2010/11/5 Denys Dmytriyenko <[email protected]>: > On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 04:34:42PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: >> Hi >> >> In recent discussions there seems to be a lot of interest in moving >> towards more layered structure in OE where we discussed machine >> layers and arch based layers. There certainly are advantages to this >> approach as discussed in other threads on mailing list >> I think poky has already achieved that to a certain extent and has >> made metadata changes >> needed for such a structure. There are other polishing to metadata >> which is beneficial in general like recipe licenses, gcc runtime >> demystification etc. I would like to suggest that we adopt this >> structure and use Poky as core layer which we >> should always maintain in coherence and add the extra >> machines,architectures and recipes as additional layers around >> the base layer. >> >> This will also help us to scale the project and >> reduce the to and fro in merges as well as communities at large will >> benefit by seamless flow >> of patches and other contributions. >> >> This will of course need a lot of work and I wanted to bring to >> everyone to know if this would be a good approach moving >> forward. > > Khem, > > That is already being discussed and decided. See the following previous topics > on the mailing list... > > The raw OEDEM meeting notes, where if you read carefully (and between the > lines :) you can see the suggestion of using Poky as a new core being > discussed: > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/39108 > > Call for open discussion and future plans for advancing OpenEmbedded and > Yocto Project: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded/39114 > > -- > Denys
Denys, I don't think it is decided yet. At OEDEM it was suggested and discussed, but not really decided. (and actually I doubt if OEDEM would be the right place to decide this, especially in such a short timeframe without getting the rest of the community involved). And the call for open discussion is just that, a call for open discussion. However, I do see consensus emerging, and personally I think the proposal of Khem is a good idea. Actually I already did a small test. It seems the most troublesome issues in merging things are - the legacy staging that still exists in quite some OE recipes - bbclasses that are out of sync (or do not exist in yocto, but in that case they could be in an OE overlay) - toolchain related issues. E.g. for ppc there is no spe support yet in yocto; however this is being worked on) I know merging it will still be a lot of work and won't happen without fallout. Then again I am more than willing to do my share of the work. My main concern is how to deal with all the old stuff we accumulated. In order to move to a layered structure with quality recipes we might need to move them over one by one (fixing things like LICENSE while we're at it). Frans _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
