On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 10:36:20PM +0200, Enrico wrote: >> Sorry to jump into the discussion but...am i the only one that thinks >> that having meta-beagle, meta-panda, meta-whateverTIboard is crazy? > > Not to argue that it's better, but how is it different from meta-cedartrail, > meta-crownbay, meta-emenlow, meta-sugarbay and all the other Intel boards?
I admit i know nothing about them and why they are organized like that. But, in my experience, it's really useful to see what happens in boards similar to what i'm using/developing for. For example thanks to Koen beagle patches i learned about smartreflex and crashing dm3730, or a patch coming from linux-omap to enable 720mhz on 3530, or a patch to fix mmc timeout issues. (i know, pretty old examples!). In other words the more i know about an arch, the better it is. And it's easier to follow meta-ti instead of meta-beagle-that-is-not-ti, meta-panda, meta-whatever, expecially when i have no (direct) reason to use those meta layers. But i maintain nothing in meta-ti so it's easy for me to see it in this way. Enrico _______________________________________________ meta-ti mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-ti
