On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 06:06, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> I don't see why it isn't reasonable. If they need a change done sooner
>> than can be done by pushing it upstream, they can put it into a local
>> layer until it makes it into oe-core. Seems simple enough to me.
>
> Furthermore, poky is the only d
Op 17 sep. 2011, om 04:55 heeft Chris Larson het volgende geschreven:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Mark Hatle wrote:
>>> 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 o
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Mark Hatle wrote:
>> 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
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 16:45, Mark Hatle wrote:
> On 9/16/11 2:06 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 14:49, Paul Eggleton
>> 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
On 9/16/11 2:06 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 14:49, Paul Eggleton
> 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.
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 14:49, Paul Eggleton
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 w
On Friday 16 September 2011 18:18:43 you wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 14:16, Paul Eggleton
>
> wrote:
> > On Friday 16 September 2011 18:08:04 Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> More then once I wanted to pick a patch that was in poky and not yet
> >> merged into oe-core and it wasn't that easy to s
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 14:16, Paul Eggleton
wrote:
> On Friday 16 September 2011 18:08:04 Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> More then once I wanted to pick a patch that was in poky and not yet
>> merged into oe-core and it wasn't that easy to split it.
>
> Can you give a specific example of this?
>
> Sin
On Friday 16 September 2011 18:08:04 Otavio Salvador wrote:
> More then once I wanted to pick a patch that was in poky and not yet
> merged into oe-core and it wasn't that easy to split it.
Can you give a specific example of this?
Since the split, there have never been any patches intentionally m
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 13:51, Richard Purdie
wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 10:29 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 09:54, Richard Purdie
>> wrote:
>> > Its been mentioned to me that we perhaps haven't made it really clear
>> > what is happening with OE-Core at the moment.
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 10:29 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 09:54, Richard Purdie
> wrote:
> > Its been mentioned to me that we perhaps haven't made it really clear
> > what is happening with OE-Core at the moment. When we started this off,
> > we agreed to try and get on a
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 09:54, Richard Purdie
wrote:
> Its been mentioned to me that we perhaps haven't made it really clear
> what is happening with OE-Core at the moment. When we started this off,
> we agreed to try and get on a roughly six month release cadence so
> people had some idea of what
Its been mentioned to me that we perhaps haven't made it really clear
what is happening with OE-Core at the moment. When we started this off,
we agreed to try and get on a roughly six month release cadence so
people had some idea of what to expect from the project and when. We
decided to put that i
13 matches
Mail list logo
