On 02/12/2015 08:17, "openembedded-core-bounces@... on
behalf of Martin Jansa" <openembedded-core-bounces@...
on behalf of martin.jansa@...> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 04:01:40PM +1300, Paul Eggleton wrote:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2015 11:47:20 Martin Jansa wrote:I'm not familiar with FDO fork, so I don't know how it looks and
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 07:49:50AM +1300, Paul Eggleton wrote:it can
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 10:19:35 Trevor Woerner wrote:
On 11/26/15 16:00, Paul Eggleton wrote:
trying to ensure that the patch validation is generic enough so
live in OE-Core, and thus we can easily update and refine it
line with the code itself as well as encourage submitters to
script on their own changes before sending.This all sounds like an improvement and is therefore a step in
A while back I had the idea of "porting" the kernel's
The Yocto Project (it was around the same time that I was trying
float the whole "Maintainers File" idea too, since I was also
re-purpose "get-maintainer.pl" as well). About one minute into
effort I realized the existing *.bb files were all over the place
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,
another one from The Yocto Project, each of which described a
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
the potential for feathers to be ruffled on both sides if someone
to produce a definitive style guide for recipe files and then
it in an automated way. Since it is the OpenEmbedded Project's
provide the recipes for The Yocto Project, I'm guessing this
needs to be decided by them? If that sounds reasonable, then
Yocto Project needs to acquiesce to OE's decision?I don't think there's that much of a division. I don't recall if it
that raised it at the time but the issue of having two style guides
rectified - I changed the one on the Yocto Project wiki to simply
link to the OE style guide in June last year. It certainly didn't
about through a conscious decision to have a different style.
However there is a minor disagreement over indentation for shell
between OE-Core and other layers - this persists because of the
pain a blanket replacement would potentially lead to. As I recall
get discussed at the OE TSC level. I think that's one thing we
not evaluate (or make an option) until such time as we resolve theUsing consistent indentation (4 spaces) at least for new metadata
difference - and I do mean to see it resolved at some point in the
be step in right direction.I agree it's not ideal. I said above, I do want to see it resolved.
With the amount of changes which are backported to older releases I
still don't see this "backporting pain" argument. Doing it just before
the release is of course useful, because e.g. now more changes will be
backported to Jethro than to Fido or Dizzy. So having consistent
indentation in Jethro and master would prevent 95% of "backporting
pain". Maybe some Yocto 10.0 will finally get the meaning of
Leaving indentation aside for a moment do you have any comments on my
This is how it looks like currentlyhttp://patchwork.freedesktop.org/project/intel-gfx/patches/
but any improvement on patchwork side is definitely welcome and
I appreciate it.
Does it support e.g. moving the patches to given bundle based on some
substring in subject? To sort e.g. meta-networking, meta-java,
meta-browser, .. patches automatically?
Mmm, you might not like this, but we are thinking of getting rid of
bundles. Basically, we assumed bundles were a manual way of creating patch
series. The new Patchwork can identify series, so we thought: great!
Bundles no longer needed.
There are other features been considered that might be an alternative to
bundles, like tagging
I don't expect FDO fork to provide other features I'm used to from
gerrit like cherry-picking to selected branch from the UI or doing the
review there. But still if we're stuck with patchwork forever (because
some people hate gerrit), then any improvement is really appreciated,
thanks for looking into it.
My only concern is about migrating current database, do you know if the
migration will keep the database including bundles as they are or do you
plan to set FDO version in parallel at least for some transition period?
Currently I have many patches in flight, because jenkins is running full
test-dependencies job for last 11 and based on progress it will take
14-21 more days to finish.
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@...