Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Wolfgang,
>
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Simon,
> >
> > In message you wrote:
> >> > I have started on it - I've ported over the Kbuild infrastructure into
> >> > a dedicated 'kbuild' makefile which is called from the main makefile.
>
Hi Wolfgang,
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Simon,
>
> In message
> you
> wrote:
>>
>> > I have started on it - I've ported over the Kbuild infrastructure into a
>> > dedicated 'kbuild' makefile which is called from the main makefile. This
>> > make modifications
Dear Simon,
In message
you wrote:
>
> > I have started on it - I've ported over the Kbuild infrastructure into a
> > dedicated 'kbuild' makefile which is called from the main makefile. This
> > make modifications to the existing makefile very minimal
> >
> > Now it's just a case of building all
Hi Graeme,
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Kim & Marek,
>
> On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Dear Kim Phillips,
>>
>>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>>>
>>> Detlev Zundel wrote:
as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM201
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:16:12AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > Running a full MAKEALL for all architectures and boards, for all
> > (> 40) repositories, every 24 hours, requires more CPU and I/O cycles
> > that we can currently afford.
>
> MAKEALL is indeed con
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:16:12AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
[snip]
> Running a full MAKEALL for all architectures and boards, for all
> (> 40) repositories, every 24 hours, requires more CPU and I/O cycles
> that we can currently afford.
MAKEALL is indeed consuming. But I wanted to follow up
On 07/23/2012 04:06 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
Dear Eric Nelson,
Yea ... I think our community is kinda broken :-(
Hey. We heard that...
Careful what you say on an open mic!
Oh man ... I guess it sounded bad indeed, I should have though about the wording
more, sorry.
I mean, we messed up the
Dear Eric Nelson,
> > Yea ... I think our community is kinda broken :-(
>
> Hey. We heard that...
>
> Careful what you say on an open mic!
Oh man ... I guess it sounded bad indeed, I should have though about the
wording
more, sorry.
I mean, we messed up the management (and I wonder who'll st
Dear Tom Rini,
> On 07/23/2012 11:11 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Tom Rini,
> >
> >> On 07/23/2012 10:17 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> Dear Tom Rini,
> >>>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Tom Rini,
> >
> >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:20:15AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Marek Vasut,
> >
> > In message <201207230347.31993.ma...@denx.de> you wrote:
> > > > Yes, I know. Hmmm, maybe if every 24 hours the auto build
infrastructure:
> > > > - Runs a MAKEALL on the mainline repo
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 04:40:27PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > The other problem is how to find the boards that actually need rebuild on
> > per- patch basis. And for generic patches, we'll need to do MAKEALL
> > across all architectures anyway, which takes a bit
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 08:20:15AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Marek Vasut,
>
> In message <201207230347.31993.ma...@denx.de> you wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, I know. Hmmm, maybe if every 24 hours the auto build infrastructure:
> > > - Runs a MAKEALL on the mainline repo (if any patches have been
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 04:40:27PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
[snip]
> The other problem is how to find the boards that actually need rebuild on per-
> patch basis. And for generic patches, we'll need to do MAKEALL across all
> architectures anyway, which takes a bit of time.
I think we (custodia
On 07/23/2012 11:11 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
>
>> On 07/23/2012 10:17 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> Dear Tom Rini,
>>>
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Tom Rini,
> On 07/23/2012 10:17 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Tom Rini,
> >
> >> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> Dear Tom Rini,
> >>>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > And Jenkins.
On 07/23/2012 10:17 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
Dear Tom Rini,
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
Dear Tom Rini,
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
[snip]
And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
to run test bui
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Tom Rini,
> >
> > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > > And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
> > > > to run test bu
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 02:28:45PM +1000, Graeme Russ wrote:
[snip]
> I don't think a protracted 'tool x' doesn't do this and 'tool y' doesn't do
> that is going to get us anywhere.
Agreed, even if I did just reply to Marek :)
> What we need to do is define exactly what we want out of the patch
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 03:27:30AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
>
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
> > > to run test builds for U-Boot. I can tell you a
Marek wrote loads of stuff then wrote...
> But then, how shall we go about it? Any python gurus around?
I wouldn't class myself as a "guru" as that should be a title that is
bestowed on you by others but I know a fair amount of Python and might be
able to have a go at implementing some of this st
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
you wrote:
>
> What I am thinking is a patch tracker (not manager) which basically has an
> internal queue of unapplied (to mainline) patches. When a patch gets
> submitted, it will be sanity checked (checkpatch). If the sanity checks
> pass (or are overruled) then
Dear Marek Vasut,
In message <201207230347.31993.ma...@denx.de> you wrote:
>
> > Yes, I know. Hmmm, maybe if every 24 hours the auto build infrastructure:
> > - Runs a MAKEALL on the mainline repo (if any patches have been committed)
>
> Certainly ... it takes 16 hours to do so on my dedicated m
Dear Graeme,
In message
you wrote:
>
> Yes, I know. Hmmm, maybe if every 24 hours the auto build infrastructure:
> - Runs a MAKEALL on the mainline repo (if any patches have been committed)
> - Runs a MAKEALL after applying all patches meeting pre-determined
>conditions. For example:
>
Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Marek,
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Graeme Russ,
> >
> >> Yes - But see above. If the build infrastructure is building with all
> >> the repos applied we will get instant feedback that a repo is
> >> out-of-step with mainline rather th
Hi Marek,
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
>> Yes - But see above. If the build infrastructure is building with all the
>> repos applied we will get instant feedback that a repo is out-of-step with
>> mainline rather than waiting for Wolfgang to pull.
>
>
Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Marek,
>
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Graeme Russ,
> >
> >> Patchwork is GPL'd and, in my personal opinion, gets fairly close to
> >> what we might need. Maybe we could take Patchwork and modify it to suit
> >> our needs?
> >
> > Maybe
Hi Marek,
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
>> Patchwork is GPL'd and, in my personal opinion, gets fairly close to what
>> we might need. Maybe we could take Patchwork and modify it to suit our
>> needs?
>
> Maybe ... where're the sources?
git clone git:
Dear Graeme Russ,
[...]
> >> Maybe it's time to seriously look at a gerrit + jenkins based solution?
> >
> > I am not sure that gerrit will solve any of the problems we have.
> > I may be missing it, but for example I don't see any integration into
> > a mostly e-mail based work flow. From what
Dear Graeme Russ,
> Hi Scott,
>
> On 07/21/2012 07:40 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On 07/20/2012 04:34 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> >> Hi Kim & Marek,
> >>
> >> On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> Dear Kim Phillips,
> >>>
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>
> Detlev Zun
Dear Wolfgang Denk,
> Dear Graeme Russ,
>
> In message you wrote:
> > > Currently the lack of any reaction whatsoever was identified to be a
> > > very discouraging sign for contributors. One thing we could do is to
> > > declare a "soft" time-limit (two weeks) that patches need to be looked
> >
Hi All,
On 07/21/2012 11:27 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
>>> to run test builds for U-Boot. I can tell you a thing or two about
Dear Tom Rini,
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
> > to run test builds for U-Boot. I can tell you a thing or two about
> > it, and Marek has his own story to tell about his exp
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:21:40AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
[snip]
> And Jenkins... well, we have been using this for some time internally
> to run test builds for U-Boot. I can tell you a thing or two about
> it, and Marek has his own story to tell about his experiences when he
> added to the
Hi Scott,
On 07/21/2012 07:40 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/20/2012 04:34 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>> Hi Kim & Marek,
>>
>> On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> Dear Kim Phillips,
>>>
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
Detlev Zundel wrote:
> as promised, here are my exp
On 07/20/2012 04:34 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
> Hi Kim & Marek,
>
> On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Dear Kim Phillips,
>>
>>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>>>
>>> Detlev Zundel wrote:
as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM2012
last week. It
Hi Kim & Marek,
On 07/21/2012 07:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Kim Phillips,
>
>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>>
>> Detlev Zundel wrote:
>>> as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM2012
>>> last week. It was a pleasure to get some core developers into one ro
Dear Kim Phillips,
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
>
> Detlev Zundel wrote:
> > as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM2012
> > last week. It was a pleasure to get some core developers into one room
>
> Any word on Kconfig support?
>
> Kim
I was digging in it
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 23:30:49 +0200
Detlev Zundel wrote:
> as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM2012
> last week. It was a pleasure to get some core developers into one room
Any word on Kconfig support?
Kim
___
U-Boot ma
On Wednesday 18 July 2012 03:41:39 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Graeme Russ wrote:
> > Also, if one (and only one) maintainer is Cc'd on a patch, it would be
> > nice is it was automatically assigned to them. Same goes for tags in the
> > patch subject - there should be a way to automatically assign a fa
Hi Wolfgang,
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Graeme,
>
> In message <5005562e.6070...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>>
>> I think U-Boot has reached the point that purely manual patch management is
>> not longer cutting the mustard.
>
> 100% agreed. The problem I see is that
Dear Graeme Russ,
In message
you wrote:
>
> > Currently the lack of any reaction whatsoever was identified to be a
> > very discouraging sign for contributors. One thing we could do is to
> > declare a "soft" time-limit (two weeks) that patches need to be looked
> > at. After this time-limit,
Dear Graeme,
In message <5005562e.6070...@gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> I think U-Boot has reached the point that purely manual patch management is
> not longer cutting the mustard.
100% agreed. The problem I see is that we haven't found a tool that
provides the needed interfaces to deal with the a
On 07/17/2012 10:10 PM, Graeme Russ wrote:
>
> Maybe it's time to seriously look at a gerrit + jenkins based solution?
>
Here's a good demo video:
http://alblue.bandlem.com/2011/02/gerrit-git-review-with-jenkins-ci.html
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-B
Hi Stefan,
On 07/17/2012 08:37 PM, Stefan Roese wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 July 2012 01:11:01 Graeme Russ wrote:
>>> It was discussed whether to do some "automatic" merging of these
>>> per-custodian trees into a central next, but majority of people believed
>>> that the patch handling process should
On Tuesday 17 July 2012 01:11:01 Graeme Russ wrote:
> > It was discussed whether to do some "automatic" merging of these
> > per-custodian trees into a central next, but majority of people believed
> > that the patch handling process should remain as unchanged as possible
> > in sync with the "prin
Hi Detlev,
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Detlev Zundel wrote:
>
> * Conflict resolution: setting up a moderator procedure for
> unhappy submitters
>
> A recent occurence on the mailing list where contributers were sent
> through multiple rounds of patch submissions for non-obvious reasons w
Hi,
as promised, here are my expanded notes from the BoF meeting at LSM2012
last week. It was a pleasure to get some core developers into one room
at the same time and discuss controversial topics without the health of
any one attendant being in jeopardy at any time, so thanks again to
everybody
47 matches
Mail list logo
