Re: [meta-kde][PATCH 3/3] README: update contributor list

From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
Cc: Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [meta-kde][PATCH 3/3] README: update contributor list
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 15:30:39 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1362670239.9443.97.camel@ted> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E780D109-3D15-488F-8CC9-F6829BEE90F1@dominion.thruhere.net>

On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 15:03 +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 7 mrt. 2013, om 14:04 heeft Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 01:09:38PM +0100, Samuel Stirtzel wrote:
> >> 2013/3/7 Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>:
> >>> Signed-off-by: Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>
> >>> ---
> >>> README | 2 +-
> >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>> 
> >>> diff --git a/README b/README
> >>> index 0635e10..cab1e21 100644
> >>> --- a/README
> >>> +++ b/README
> >>> @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ Samuel Stirtzel <s.stirtzel@googlemail.com>
> >>> Contributors:
> >>> Copyright 2012 - Kai Kang
> >>> Copyright 2013 - Khem Raj
> >>> -Copyright 2012 - Koen Kooi
> >>> +Copyright 2012, 2013 - Koen Kooi
> >>> Copyright 2012 - Robert Yang
> >>> Copyright 2011, 2012 - Samuel Stirtzel
> >>> 
> >>> --
> >>> 1.8.1.4
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> Thanks for your patches,
> >> I applied them all.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Unrelated to your patches:
> >> There are some upcoming changes, but they don't fit into yocto 1.4
> >> (assumed that yocto is the orientation point for third-party OE-layer
> >> releases).
> >> So there will be a yocto-1.4 branch in advance and the development
> >> will continue on master.
> > 
> > It would be nice to know yocto-1.4 release name in advance and name it
> > the same as branch in oe-core/meta-oe will be (denzil, danny, ...), but
> > I guess it can be renamed later.
> 
> For angstrom I'm going to use 'yocto-1.4' in the branch name, I have
> trouble remembering which names maps to which release. And the Yocto
> compliance program talks about 1.3, .14 etc, not about codenames.

That is just going to cause even more confusion. That branch is for
Angstrom 1.4, right?

It was never intended to inflict any specific version onto any specific
project which is why the names are versionless. We do need to show what
is compatible with what hence the codenames. I've long since decided
this is a topic there is no one right answer to though so we'll just
have to live with where we are and make the most of it. I've sent out
emails about this before too.

If we need to know the name of the branch more in advance, that is
straight forward to arrange, I just need to pick the next one.

Cheers,

Richard