[Note, Koen is trying to get davest to respond quickly by trying a top post.
Good work, Koen!]
>From: Koen Kooi [mailto:k...@dominion.thruhere.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 7:04 AM
>
>Dave,
>
>Coud summarize the discussion about this during bspfest, collab and the AB
>meeting please?
Evide
Dave,
Coud summarize the discussion about this during bspfest, collab and the AB
meeting please?
regards,
Koen
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 21:00 heeft Osier-mixon, Jeffrey het volgende geschreven:
> As I understand it - Poky is sort of a "reference distro" for the Yocto
> system. I think Angstrom wo
On 04/03/2012 10:34 AM, Brian Hutchinson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Chris Larson wrote:
>> I really don't see what the issue is here. If you want a stable
>> branch, we can look into creating such a thing upstream, though I'm
>> personally of the opinion that master should remain r
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Chris Larson wrote:
> I really don't see what the issue is here. If you want a stable
> branch, we can look into creating such a thing upstream, though I'm
> personally of the opinion that master should remain release-quality,
> and make better use of feature branch
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 10:08:44AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>> On 04/03/2012 09:44 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
>> > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:32:27AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> >> -BEGIN PGP
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 10:08:44AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> On 04/03/2012 09:44 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:32:27AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
> >> On 04/03/2012 09:25 A
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/03/2012 09:44 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:32:27AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>>
>>
>> On 04/03/2012 09:25 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:01:0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/03/2012 09:40 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:32:27AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 04/03/2012 09:25 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:01:01AM -0700, D
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:32:27AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> On 04/03/2012 09:25 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:01:01AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Clear reproducible testing
>
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:32:27AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 04/03/2012 09:25 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:01:01AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Clear reproducible testing
> >> re
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/03/2012 09:25 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:01:01AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Clear reproducible testing
>> results. Whether or not a pair of git clones and some tinkering
>> can resu
On Tue, Apr 03, 2012 at 09:01:01AM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Clear reproducible testing results. Whether or not a pair of git
> clones and some tinkering can result in the same thing as a poky
> repository or not isn't relevant in my opinion. I believe that we
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/02/2012 10:13 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 07:27:16PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
>
Hi Tom,
> [snip]
>> You've mentioned preferring to do this with set versions of
>> bitbake and oe-core. Do oe-core and bitbake maintain stable
>
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 07:27:16PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
[snip]
> You've mentioned preferring to do this with set versions of bitbake and
> oe-core. Do oe-core and bitbake maintain stable branches? I didn't think
> they did. This makes it difficult to stabilize a release, and poky
> serves thi
On Sun, 2012-04-01 at 21:08 -0700, Matthew McClintock wrote:
> I think we should consider a "standard way" of integrating layers and
> other bits. One method is (and I'm not recommending it) using 'git
> submodules' - another is 'androids repo command'. If all the distros
> (poky, angstrom, MEL, et
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Richard Purdie
wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 20:00 -0700, Chris Larson wrote:
>> Not to be terribly pendatic or difficult here, but technically, the
>> comparison you make here doesn't ring true. bitbake in poky *still*
>> has changes that never went into the ups
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Khem Raj wrote:
> I think the repository format used for poky in yocto project
> could also be confusing things. Since it does not clone openembedded-core
> or bitbake from upstream locations but maintains a copy of its own. even
> though they are ditto copies of u
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Richard Purdie
wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 15:18 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote:
>> On 3/30/12 2:33 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> >
>> > Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
>> >
>> >> On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >
On Friday 30 March 2012 11:44:23 Koen Kooi wrote:
> The Angstrom core team would like to move angstrom under the yocto banner so
> we can formally claim to be 'yocto'.
I think a lot of points have been well addressed in this thread already, but I
wanted to add (and reiterate) a few things. None o
Reading the discussion, I was wondering whether something under the
yocto umbrella should be self-contained layerwise.
E.g. would it be ok to depend on an external meta-whatsoever?
If so, this does have some quality implications, especially if the
external repo has higher prio and contains alterna
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 20:00 -0700, Chris Larson wrote:
> Not to be terribly pendatic or difficult here, but technically, the
> comparison you make here doesn't ring true. bitbake in poky *still*
> has changes that never went into the upstream repository.
I was surprised to hear that but its easy e
On 03/30/2012 08:00 PM, Chris Larson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
>> On 03/30/2012 06:37 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>
>>> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 18:21 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
So that brings us back to what does it mean for Angstrom to be a Yo
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
> On 03/30/2012 06:37 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 18:21 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
>>>
>>> So that brings us back to what does it mean for Angstrom to be a Yocto
>>> Project project I guess?
>>>
>>> In my very h
On 03/30/2012 06:37 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 18:21 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
>>
>> So that brings us back to what does it mean for Angstrom to be a Yocto
>> Project project I guess?
>>
>> In my very humble opinion (really), it still makes sense to build
>> An
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 18:21 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
>
> So that brings us back to what does it mean for Angstrom to be a Yocto
> Project project I guess?
>
> In my very humble opinion (really), it still makes sense to build
> Angstrom with the components in the poky repository a
On 03/30/2012 05:53 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 17:28 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
>
>>
>>
>> On 03/30/2012 05:08 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>
>>> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 16:52 heeft Darren Hart het volgende
>>> geschreven:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
On 03/30/2012 02:11
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 17:28 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
>
>
> On 03/30/2012 05:08 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 16:52 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> On 03/30/2012 02:11 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
The criteria I see for b
On 03/30/2012 05:08 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 16:52 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
>
> [snip]
>
>> On 03/30/2012 02:11 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>>
>>> The criteria I see for being part of the Yocto Project are:
>>>
>>> a) Sharing the project's objectives (e.g
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 16:52 heeft Darren Hart het volgende geschreven:
[snip]
> On 03/30/2012 02:11 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
>>
>> The criteria I see for being part of the Yocto Project are:
>>
>> a) Sharing the project's objectives (e.g. making embedded Liunx
>> development easier)
>> b) Wi
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 16:49 heeft Tom Rini het volgende geschreven:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:06:04PM +, Stewart, David C wrote:
>
>> Finally, Dr. Kooi has stated that he doesn't see YP as an upstream. In fact,
>> many
>> of the OSVs (like Wind River, Mentor Graphics and now ENEA - yeah!)
On 03/30/2012 02:11 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 15:18 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote:
>> On 3/30/12 2:33 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>
>>> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
>>>
On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> RP said I sh
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:06:04PM +, Stewart, David C wrote:
> Finally, Dr. Kooi has stated that he doesn't see YP as an upstream. In fact,
> many
> of the OSVs (like Wind River, Mentor Graphics and now ENEA - yeah!) absolutely
> want to use YP as their upstream. So I'm hoping we could chan
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 04:09:37PM -0700, Chris Larson wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Stewart, David C
> wrote:
> >>From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto-
> >>boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Richard Purdie
> >>Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 2:11 PM
> >>
> >>The criteri
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Stewart, David C
wrote:
>>From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto-
>>boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Richard Purdie
>>Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 2:11 PM
>>
>>The criteria I see for being part of the Yocto Project are:
>>
>>a) Sharing the project
>From: yocto-boun...@yoctoproject.org [mailto:yocto-
>boun...@yoctoproject.org] On Behalf Of Richard Purdie
>Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 2:11 PM
>
>The criteria I see for being part of the Yocto Project are:
>
>a) Sharing the project's objectives (e.g. making embedded Liunx
> development easier)
I just thought I'd chime in on this discussion as someone who is outside of
both groups. It's been difficult to explain to our teams internally the whole
Yocto Project vs. Angstrom-core terminology, and since everyone here is
familiar with Linux and distros, we decided to put it in those terms.
My apologies for loosing the reply indent, I blame apple mail
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 14:01 heeft Osier-mixon, Jeffrey het volgende geschreven:
>
> Angstrom does use oe-core, but I don't think it uses linux-yocto (right?) and
> definitely not meta-yocto.
linux-yocto is a kernel, which is used by m
On Fri, 2012-03-30 at 15:18 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 3/30/12 2:33 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >
> > Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
> >
> >> On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> RP said I should raise this on the yocto lists, so here it is:
Le Fri, 30 Mar 2012 13:45:16 -0700,
Tom Rini a écrit :
> > It's hard to call something Yocto Project based unless it used
> > something from the Yocto Project. meta-yocto being on of those
> > components.
>
> So bitbake and oe-core don't count because they're external projects?
>
on the technic
I have some hope of bringing a little bit of order to the chaos that seems
to be ensuing here. I am speaking here from my own understanding, which may
or may not be correct.
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 3/30/12 2:33 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
>>
>> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26
>
> >> It's hard to call something Yocto Project based unless it used
> >> something from the Yocto Project. meta-yocto being on of those
> >> components.
> >
> > So bitbake and oe-core don't count because they're external projects?
>
> If oe-core doesn't count, that will go directly against the a
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 13:45 heeft Tom Rini het volgende geschreven:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 03:18:06PM -0500, Mark Hatle wrote:
>> On 3/30/12 2:33 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>>
>>> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
>>>
On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 03:18:06PM -0500, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 3/30/12 2:33 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >
> >Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
> >
> >>On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> >>>Hi,
> >>>
> >>>RP said I should raise this on the yocto lists, so here it i
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 13:18 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
> On 3/30/12 2:33 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
Hi,
RP said I should raise this on the yocto lists, so
On 3/30/12 2:33 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
Hi,
RP said I should raise this on the yocto lists, so here it is:
The Angstrom core team would like to move angstrom under the yocto banner so
we ca
Op 30 mrt. 2012, om 12:26 heeft Mark Hatle het volgende geschreven:
> On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> RP said I should raise this on the yocto lists, so here it is:
>>
>> The Angstrom core team would like to move angstrom under the yocto banner so
>> we can formally claim to b
On 3/30/12 1:44 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:
Hi,
RP said I should raise this on the yocto lists, so here it is:
The Angstrom core team would like to move angstrom under the yocto banner so
we can formally claim to be 'yocto'.
For it to be on the yocto project web site, it just need to have the layers
As I understand it - Poky is sort of a "reference distro" for the Yocto
system. I think Angstrom would be an excellent addition as an alternative,
and I'd be happy to do anything needed on the community side to help.
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> RP said I should ra
Hi,
RP said I should raise this on the yocto lists, so here it is:
The Angstrom core team would like to move angstrom under the yocto banner so we
can formally claim to be 'yocto'.
What is the process to make that happen? I suspect OSVs will need to know as
well, since lately yocto is being de
49 matches
Mail list logo
