All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [oe] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.
Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 18:45:04 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1314985504.5939.635.camel@rex> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP9ODKq17NP3E8BZOm-P41W4s_y+1z7iTre7bML-_D0WofeQWw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 14:35 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 13:47, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:53 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:33, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> >> > That sounds like people should just subscribe to oe-core if they want to be aware of changes instead of merging the 2 lists.
> >>
> >> Many times changes are related to meta-oe and oe-core and we'd need to
> >> cross-post and seems wrong.
> >
> > I don't think this is actually true and its reasonable to assume
> > discussion on OE-Core is seen by everyone.
> >
> > You therefore need an OE-Core subscription or both with the latter
> > recommended. The benefit is the two lists give some kind of filtering of
> > the email topics.
> 
> I am sorry but I disagree. All those affect the layers and thus
> changes on oe-core are important to meta-oe so they are all related.
> Besides not everyone follow both.

I think the expectation is you need to subscribe to OE-Core in all cases
and we just need to ensure that expectation is communicated.

This also helps people who want to keep up with core changes but aren't
interested in the upper layer activities. Asking them to filter out a
ton of email on oe-devel simply isn't reasonable.

> Personally I've been following mostly oe-core and skipped oe and
> someone might be doing the other way around; patch management has
> nothing to do with mailing list topic and this we can assume this is
> easy to fix using patchwork and proper subject on patches.

Having done some patch management myself (at least 4095 patches in the
last year) I'll respectfully disagree.

Cheers,

Richard





WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Cc: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [OE-core] Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again.
Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 18:45:04 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1314985504.5939.635.camel@rex> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP9ODKq17NP3E8BZOm-P41W4s_y+1z7iTre7bML-_D0WofeQWw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 14:35 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 13:47, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 10:53 -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 10:33, Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net> wrote:
> >> > That sounds like people should just subscribe to oe-core if they want to be aware of changes instead of merging the 2 lists.
> >>
> >> Many times changes are related to meta-oe and oe-core and we'd need to
> >> cross-post and seems wrong.
> >
> > I don't think this is actually true and its reasonable to assume
> > discussion on OE-Core is seen by everyone.
> >
> > You therefore need an OE-Core subscription or both with the latter
> > recommended. The benefit is the two lists give some kind of filtering of
> > the email topics.
> 
> I am sorry but I disagree. All those affect the layers and thus
> changes on oe-core are important to meta-oe so they are all related.
> Besides not everyone follow both.

I think the expectation is you need to subscribe to OE-Core in all cases
and we just need to ensure that expectation is communicated.

This also helps people who want to keep up with core changes but aren't
interested in the upper layer activities. Asking them to filter out a
ton of email on oe-devel simply isn't reasonable.

> Personally I've been following mostly oe-core and skipped oe and
> someone might be doing the other way around; patch management has
> nothing to do with mailing list topic and this we can assume this is
> easy to fix using patchwork and proper subject on patches.

Having done some patch management myself (at least 4095 patches in the
last year) I'll respectfully disagree.

Cheers,

Richard





  reply	other threads:[~2011-09-02 17:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-02 11:25 Please merge lists openembedded-devel and openembedded-core again Paul Menzel
2011-09-02 13:05 ` [oe] " Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 13:05   ` Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 13:19   ` [oe] " Richard Purdie
2011-09-02 13:19     ` [OE-core] " Richard Purdie
2011-09-02 13:23     ` [oe] " Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 13:23       ` [OE-core] " Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 13:33       ` [oe] " Koen Kooi
2011-09-02 13:33         ` [OE-core] " Koen Kooi
2011-09-02 13:53         ` [oe] " Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 13:53           ` [OE-core] " Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 16:47           ` [oe] " Richard Purdie
2011-09-02 16:47             ` [OE-core] " Richard Purdie
2011-09-02 17:35             ` [oe] " Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 17:35               ` [OE-core] " Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 17:45               ` Richard Purdie [this message]
2011-09-02 17:45                 ` Richard Purdie
2011-09-03 17:36             ` Detlef Vollmann
2011-09-02 15:21     ` Paul Menzel
2011-09-02 17:00       ` [oe] " Richard Purdie
2011-09-02 17:00         ` [OE-core] " Richard Purdie
2011-09-02 17:38         ` [oe] " Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 17:38           ` [OE-core] " Otavio Salvador
2011-09-02 20:18         ` Paul Menzel
2011-09-02 20:51           ` Andreas Müller
2011-09-02 18:48       ` [oe] " Phil Blundell
2011-09-02 18:48         ` [OE-core] " Phil Blundell
2011-09-02 19:29         ` Andreas Müller
2011-09-02 21:34           ` Koen Kooi
2011-09-02 21:49             ` Paul Menzel
2011-09-03  7:08               ` Martin Jansa
2011-09-03  7:30               ` Eric Bénard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1314985504.5939.635.camel@rex \
    --to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.