On 21 May 2013 10:50, Riku Voipio <riku.voi...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 20 May 2013 18:05, Fathi Boudra <fathi.bou...@linaro.org> wrote: >> See http://cards.linaro.org/browse/CARD-481 > >> We want to consolidate our approaches into a single approach that >> scales across distributions. > >>> so from the perspective of a Linaro user, or a customer who will care only >>> about OE, and there will be such cases, we need to make sure that we don't >>> create a tool that is going to be counter-productive vs a 'vanilla' OE >>> solution. >> >> That's something to discuss... We don't have "customers". The >> engineering builds are done to support our engineering effort, in the >> fastest and cost effective way >> The hwpack concept is still valid but not as it used to be (hardware >> specific abstraction). We still want to have a single hwpack that >> works for the supported distributions. > > "We still want" - Well I'd like to see the list of "we" ;)
As you know, I'm in the list and I'm also the one doing the work so I guess my vote counts ;) > hwpacks were a good idea for ubuntu, but even they no longer use the concept > on ubuntu touch. > From the OE side, burying hwpacks and using OE images directly would > make our engineering effort greatly faster, simpler and more cost effective. That's your claim. Re-using an already built hwpack, re-usable across all distros, seems faster and more cost effective to me. > I don't think hwpacks are requested by fedora engineers either. or ubuntu engineers, or $distro engineer. the hwpacks are linaro specific like many things... >> There's pros/cons for both solutions. I see it as: common approach >> (hwpack+rootfs) vs native/distro specific approach. Talk to you at the >> connect session :) > > The "common approach" is more like "linaro specific approach". That's right and I'm fine with it. > If we do linaro-specific tools, we might save some of our own time - but the > distributions and endusers will have to duplicate our work in their own > setups. I'm fine with it as well. Distributions have to do their work and do their own integration. They won't use our solution anyway. If we take their own approaches, they'll redo the work anyway (as proven in the past). > If we work with native/distro specific tools and contribute back, our changes > ripple back to the actual end users. The ARM ecostystem as whole benefits. I tend to disagree. I'm looking at the past 2 years, we've worked with native/distro specific tools and I don't see our changes reaching the end users. There's only one way to reach end users and distributions, it's upstreaming. > Yes discuss at connect makes sense, just food of thought... > Riku _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
