Re: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)

From: Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com>
To: Romain Perier <romain.perier@gmail.com>,
	Jacob Chen <jacob-chen@iotwrt.com>,
	"yocto@yoctoproject.org" <yocto@yoctoproject.org>,
	Eddie Cai <eddie.cai@rock-chips.com>
Subject: Re: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 14:46:04 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHUNapT3t87kda6qXR3fgF9Oaag69-WLMhdcOKhso34518zajA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <588ba270.4c18370a.3b01f.9247.GMRIR@mx.google.com>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3410 bytes --]

Jacob,

gmail bounced this message back from the "jacob-chen@rock-chips.com" email
address since the mail handler for rock-chips.com said the "jacob-chen"
user does not exist. We can't accept a Signed-off-by line that doesn't
point to a valid email address. Please adjust your Signed-off-by line to
point to a real email address.

Best regards,
    Trevor

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Mail Delivery Subsystem <
mailer-daemon@googlemail.com> wrote:

> [image: Error Icon]
> Message not delivered
> There was a problem delivering your message to *jacob-chen@rock-chips.com*.
> See the technical details below, or try resending in a few minutes.
> The response from the remote server was:
>
> 550 jacob-chen@rock-chips.com:user not exist
>
> Final-Recipient: rfc822; jacob-chen@rock-chips.com
> Action: failed
> Status: 5.0.0
> Remote-MTA: dns; mxwcom.263xmail.com. (38.83.106.84, the server for the
> domain rock-chips.com.)
> Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 jacob-chen@rock-chips.com:user not exist
> Last-Attempt-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 11:41:36 -0800 (PST)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com>
> To: Romain Perier <romain.perier@gmail.com>
> Cc: Jacob Chen <jacob-chen@iotwrt.com>, "yocto@yoctoproject.org" <
> yocto@yoctoproject.org>, Eddie Cai <eddie.cai@rock-chips.com>, Jacob Chen
> <jacob-chen@rock-chips.com>
> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 14:41:32 -0500
> Subject: Re: [meta-rockchip][PATCH 2/7] machine: Add machine file for the
> rk3288 linux Boards
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:37 AM, Romain Perier <romain.perier@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Could you:
> > - Make one patch per new machine file and not one patch for all new added
> > machine
>
> Agreed.
>
> Are all of these machines actual devices? The evb one doesn't sound real.
>
> Are all of these machines released and available for purchase? I've
> heard of the tinkerboard (although I can't seem to find one I can
> actually buy) but I haven't heard of the fennec.
>
> > - Add a clear @DESCRIPTION for each board, see an example here:
> > https://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-rockchip/
> tree/conf/machine/firefly-rk3288.conf
> > - Write a clear and an understandable commit message for your new patches
> >
> > @Trevor: What do you think about this rk-linux.inc ? I don't like this,
> > either its name and what it contains.
>
> First off, I think it's really great to see people contributing to
> meta-rockchip! :-)
>
> This entire set of patches seems to be adding "official" support for
> the rockchip devices; in other words, these recipes will help you to
> create builds that use the official rockchip sources. That is great.
> But I think a good BSP gives a user all the possibilities but then
> leaves the final decision up to them.
>
> So I agree with Romain, I think the name could use more work. It would
> be nice if this set of patches included something in the name that let
> the user know these build from official sources. Then the user could
> decide whether they want to use the official rockchip sources, or
> whether they want to build from upstream. So I'm not opposed to the
> idea of adding recipes for official sources, I'd like like to see them
> added in a way that leaves the decision with the user.
>
>
>
> > That's it for now.
> > Thanks for your patches
>
> +1 :-)
>
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 5830 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: icon.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 2935 bytes --]