-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Leon Woestenberg schreef: | Hello Koen, | | On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 9:23 PM, Koen Kooi | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: |> | If not done yet, we have to decide to go for one of two approaches. |> | (1) .stable tracks .dev, but lags. Takes lots of efforts. |> | (2) .stable diverges from .dev, not keeping up at some point. The |> | "fish bone" branch-off approach. |> | I would prefer (2), and I think Angstrom decided for this as well |> | given the 2007-1 naming?? |> |> At the moment we try to do (1), but the long term plan is to do (2). The |> ~ main issue with (2) is that it requires either picking a alomost random |> (broken) branchpoint, or enforce a (brief) period of stabilizing .dev |> before branching of. |> | And some planning ahead is needed: | | - Announce when we branch off a new stable branch 1 month ahead (roughly). | - Announce when a stable branch goes in unmaintained mode 3 months | ahead (roughly). | - Select a branch interval, proposal is once per year or half year. | Say, 2008-7 or 2009.1, but at least afer | meta/sdk/opkg/packaged-staging has stabilized enough in .dev?
I'd say "once per year", so the next branch point would be 2008.12 and the current branch goes into sleep mode 2009.2. Ideally the branch point will be aligned with release happenings of the distros wanting to use that branch, but that isn't a hard pre-req. | I am very much in favor of keeping the tooling/framework/classes | largely feature-frozen within a stable branch, and selectively upgrade | packages. That is my idea as well, I did backport the native.bbclass change since it fixed rm_work, which is very important since the backbone of our QA effort, the autobuilder, needs that. |> Should we create an oe-stable-branch mailinglist were patches get |> presented, reviewed and signed-off on? |> | As .stable derives from Angstrom, I suggest merging all the | effort/people/processes from Angstrom over to OpenEmbedded-wide stable | should be the ideal goal. | | Is that achievable? Personally, I think it's achievable, but I can't speak for other angstrom (core) developers, but I suspect they'll go where the best support is. Do you want to write a short blurb on this we can stick on the oe and angstrom websites? regards, Koen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD8DBQFH7TGFMkyGM64RGpERArOLAKCM4e4Zekq1X4BoPT7LtthglkcTfwCfbz43 zitnTWwlLdHAulKKv66iXQc= =P39g -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Angstrom-distro-devel mailing list Angstrom-distro-devel@linuxtogo.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/angstrom-distro-devel
