On Tue, 2018-11-20 at 16:21 -0700, akuster808 wrote: > > On 11/20/18 4:05 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-11-19 at 09:47 +1300, Paul Eggleton wrote: > > > On Monday, 19 November 2018 12:11:35 AM NZDT Max Krummenacher wrote: > > > > Am Samstag, den 17.11.2018, 15:50 -0800 schrieb akuster808: > > > > > Can the maintainers of meta-qt3, meta-qt4, meta-selinux, and > > > > > meta-cgl > > > > > please add a "Thud" branch > > > > > > > > > > > > > While at it, the following patches declaring thud compatibility are > > > > not > > > > yet applied: > > > > > > > > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042780.html > > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042922.html > > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2018-October/042923.html > > > I have just taken care of meta-qt3 and meta-qt4, FWIW. > > > > Given we don't test those any more, should we be pushing these new > > branches? > > Are the branching schemes in sync with what we test , build or both? > I think we should be clear what is built or built and tested if there > are exception. > > > The 2.6 release notes called out so it may lead to the conclusion its > tested. > > Release Name: meta-qt3-thud-20.0.0 > Branch: thud > Tag: thud-20.0.0 > Hash: 02f273cba6c25f5cf20cb66d8a417a83772c3179 > md5: 7b73bf1132428ea898938b03815cad21
Scripts may have put that in the release notes and even done tagging but I'm fairly sure it doesn't get built or tested... I think processes are being followed without review. Yes, I probably should have caught this before now but I'm not alone in that :(. Cheers, Richard -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto