On 11/26/15 16:00, Paul Eggleton wrote: > I'm also > trying to ensure that the patch validation is generic enough so it can live > in > OE-Core, and thus we can easily update and refine it over time in line with > the > code itself as well as encourage submitters to use the script on their own > changes before sending.
This all sounds like an improvement and is therefore a step in the right direction :-) A while back I had the idea of "porting" the kernel's "checkpatch.pl" to The Yocto Project (it was around the same time that I was trying to float the whole "Maintainers File" idea too, since I was also trying to re-purpose "get-maintainer.pl" as well). About one minute into that effort I realized the existing *.bb files were all over the place in terms of the order of statements and the order of the blocks of statements. At that time I found one recipe style guide from OE, and another one from The Yocto Project, each of which described a slightly different preference. So I asked on the mailing list and quickly discovered that both groups prefer a different style. I'm not saying this job isn't worth doing, but I am pointing out there's the potential for feathers to be ruffled on both sides if someone tries to produce a definitive style guide for recipe files and then enforces it in an automated way. Since it is the OpenEmbedded Project's job to provide the recipes for The Yocto Project, I'm guessing this question needs to be decided by them? If that sounds reasonable, then maybe The Yocto Project needs to acquiesce to OE's decision? Instead of cross-posting, maybe this would be a good email for the new architecture list (CC'ed)? -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core