On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 16:45, Mark Hatle <mark.ha...@windriver.com> wrote: > On 9/16/11 2:06 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 14:49, Paul Eggleton >> <paul.eggle...@linux.intel.com> wrote: >>> On Friday 16 September 2011 18:18:43 you wrote: >>>> They all ended up in oe-core the problem is when they're not yet >>>> merged but I want to merge them into my tree for use, test or >>>> anything. >>> >>> Ah, so what you mean is not that the patches were in poky, but that there >>> sometimes were pull requests pointing to a branch that was on top of poky. >>> The >>> thing is, the patches are exactly the same. >> >> Yes but not pullable directly into oe-core tree. > > I mix and match for all of my development. What I do is use the git remote > and > include multiple remotes.. poky, github, etc.. > > When I find patches I want I cherry-pick them into my tree. > > Your mileage may vary, works for me at least..
Yes, works but seems easier to track one only and have it automatically merge into the Yocto one. This is specifically the idea behind the combo-layer creation and would make life much easier to all people working at oe-core. >>>> The combo-layer was one example. It was made available on poky contrib >>>> tree and I had to manually export the patches instead of pulling it >>>> into a branch for testing. >>> >>> Git makes this almost trivially easy though, and in the combo-layer example >>> it >>> was only a few patches. >>> >>> Personally, I always post my OE-core pull requests on top of an OE-core >>> branch; doing that means *I* have to manually bring the patches across as >>> files >>> and use git-am to apply them onto a branch of OE-core though. I think those >>> of >>> us working on Poky know this is the accepted practice and try to do it all >>> of >>> the time, occasionally someone might forget or feel that for an RFC patch >>> it's >>> not worth the effort; but I think that's the exception rather than the rule. >> >> Yes I know but wouldn't be better if you could base your work on >> oe-core and avoid doing this? > > For submitting to oe-core for pull requests, basing work off of oe-core is > "best > practice". However, forcing people who are working on a specific distribution > to do this isn't reasonable. It can be requested of them, but IMHO thats as > far > as it will go. For sporadic work I fully agree but for people working daily and that sends pull-request very ofthenly seems sensible that the suggested workflow to be done this way. > I'm not going to stop anyone from developing in the way that suits them best, > all I can request is the interchange to me be at least reasonable. (git and > cherry-pick is "reasonable" to me at least.) Sure; i am not saying to us to block anything but at least suggest the best workflow. > Note, I do about 70% development in oe-core and 30% in Poky. Depends where > the > bugs are found and what it takes to reproduce them. I always > cherry-pick/rebase > as appropriate to send pull requests to the appropriate place, but my > work-in-progress tree is whatever works for me at the time. I suspect others > are like that as well. If oe-core is kept in sync, use oe-core just makes things easier from my point of view. As I said the idea is not force something but advice to make it easier to everyone. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
