Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Alexander Kanavin
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 18:53, Richard Purdie < richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > I still strongly believe we need something in core which pulls together > all our pieces into a UI where you can test key elements of what we > build. If we don't have sato how do we actually test the

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] [OE-core] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Martin Jansa
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 05:53:38PM +, Richard Purdie wrote: > I still strongly believe we need something in core which pulls together > all our pieces into a UI where you can test key elements of what we > build. If we don't have sato how do we actually test the core or demo > it? > > I think

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Richard Purdie
Hi Alex, Thanks for bringing this up. On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 13:49 +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > I'd like to lay out a few ideas/thoughts on what should be done with > sato (matchbox bits) and X going forward. The inputs are: > > - Red Hat is the only company doing X maintenance anymore, and

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Alexander Kanavin
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 16:58, Mark Hatle wrote: > > I also don't think oe-core itself needs a 'real' UI, and as my previous > response > said -- we do need something though to test that the graphical framework is > working properly. > > In the past this often comes back to needing a LOT of a UI

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Mark Hatle
On 2/11/20 8:01 AM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > Specifically (sorry for the rapid-followup), I think the main value > proposition > of core is integration and testing of various language toolchains and core > libraries. UIs in embedded space can mean pretty much anything, and so I'd > leave >

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Mark Hatle
On 2/11/20 8:35 AM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > X might and likely will start to bitrot sooner for those not using RHEL 8 and > its very conservative and never changing software stack. I can imagine Red Hat > has no interest in supporting it on Fedora going forward for instance, they'll > just

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 03:35:03PM +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > X might and likely will start to bitrot sooner for those not using RHEL 8 > and its very conservative and never changing software stack. I can imagine > Red Hat has no interest in supporting it on Fedora going forward for >

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Alexander Kanavin
X might and likely will start to bitrot sooner for those not using RHEL 8 and its very conservative and never changing software stack. I can imagine Red Hat has no interest in supporting it on Fedora going forward for instance, they'll just make Xwayland work, and rip the standalone server and its

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Josef Holzmayr
Howdy! On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 02:57:48PM +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > The question is: what are the use cases for an 'example/reference UI'? Why > have one at all at this point? Remember, the core project is severely > under-staffed and we need to commit our limited resources wisely. My

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 03:01:20PM +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > Specifically (sorry for the rapid-followup), I think the main value > proposition of core is integration and testing of various language > toolchains and core libraries. UIs in embedded space can mean pretty much > anything, and

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Alexander Kanavin
Specifically (sorry for the rapid-followup), I think the main value proposition of core is integration and testing of various language toolchains and core libraries. UIs in embedded space can mean pretty much anything, and so I'd leave that to specialised layers. Alex On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Alexander Kanavin
The question is: what are the use cases for an 'example/reference UI'? Why have one at all at this point? Remember, the core project is severely under-staffed and we need to commit our limited resources wisely. Alex On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 14:53, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at

Re: [Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 01:49:27PM +0100, Alexander Kanavin wrote: >... > - matchbox is reliant on gtk3 (to be obsoleted by gtk4 this year), and does > not have a Wayland compositor. Yocto project does not have the resources to > do the gtk4 port, or add a compositor. > > - no 'lightweight

[Openembedded-architecture] Future of sato and X in oe-core

2020-02-11 Thread Alexander Kanavin
Hello, I'd like to lay out a few ideas/thoughts on what should be done with sato (matchbox bits) and X going forward. The inputs are: - Red Hat is the only company doing X maintenance anymore, and they're transitioning it to 'hard maintenance mode'