On Wed, 2016-10-12 at 17:29 +0200, Beth 'pidge' Flanagan wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-10-10 at 01:44 -0500, gm...@reliableembeddedsystems.com
> A few notes (not picking on this patch but it does point out some
> design failures and I want to at least get this on folks radar).
> I've been unhappy with how DeployArtifacts work for sometime.
> Long ago, when I wrote DeployArtifacts, it was "get it working, we'll
> refactor later" and that refactor never happened. So I'm up for
> I would like a deploy infrastructure that:
> a. Is distro/image name/etc agnostic (aka, poky and image names and
> paths hardcoded. ick.).
> b. Is perhaps config file driven.
> c. Had much less of the cruft that exists withing DeployArtifacts.
> So. Thoughts on this? I'd be willing to hear suggestions on how to do
> this before I go and spend some time ripping this apart post release?
It's quite useful to have a list of expected output of the build so
that this step can fail if a component which should be published is
I'd been planning to take a look at rewriting this build step after the
release and my initial thoughts were towards something config file
yocto mailing list