On Thu, Jan 20, 2011, Steve Langasek wrote: > - the overlay ppa is the only one that should be enabled for Linaro release > images [...]
I like the clear limits you're setting to the overlay PPA (rejecting any other concurrent overlays) > As for the 'tools' ppa, I had envisioned this as the single ppa that > developers should enable on their desktop systems to get tools they need to > work with, and develop for, current Linaro development images, particularly > when those desktops are running older versions of Ubuntu That's relatively close to the reason we created it for during the 10.05 cycle: we basically had to allow people to create/use Linaro images from a lucid install, and not everything was in lucid. So I'm also happy with this, keeping in mind that it's on a best effort basis, in particular: > I don't intend us to guarantee that the packages > won't cause regressions vs. those versions shipped in that Ubuntu release - > indeed, we know for certain that the new linaro-image-tools won't work with > images released with 10.11 - but they will be the best tools we can give you > for working with Linaro images while minimizing regressions where possible. and that's in part what triggered this thread, because I wanted to eventually provide lucid/maverick folks with updated l-i-t, but I was suddenly challenged to QA these extensively. There should only be a decently lightweight QA for the tools PPA. > The 'kernel' ppa is something of a mixed bag. There are a variety of test > kernels, bsp kernels and pre-release kernels available there, including > those we used for our bsp hwpacks in 10.11. It lacks a clear policy, and > I'm pretty sure we don't want Landing Teams to be bottlenecked on this > single PPA for their ability to build kernel packages (and hwpacks). But I > wouldn't do away with this altogether; it's clear to me that John has been > getting good use out of it. To me it sounds like this should be a ~linaro-kernel-wg/release PPA, with eventually some /beta or /daily PPA; or perhaps his own ~jcrigby PPA > Provided that the PPA uploads use proper version numbers (i.e., don't shadow > any version number that would be used in the Ubuntu or Debian archives), I > think this is reasonable. We can't generally guarantee any particular time > frame for inclusion in natty after the WG component is released, so I think > it's simpler to have a policy of "always PPA upload". Ok; this is how I felt as well, simply because of freezes Thanks! -- Loïc Minier _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
