From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f181.google.com (mail-wr0-f181.google.com [209.85.128.181]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 053C86FF80 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 2017 23:27:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr0-f181.google.com with SMTP id k61so4387911wrc.4 for ; Mon, 06 Nov 2017 15:27:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FM4lmVs/oFeytjE3xnkWPccoNwqoiHA+rJHbp+spOO4=; b=kezU/kxdMRNrU3yIi14LRMc38kqUWvyYSiL0xnIq/5DhKhZ7tU+nOTNNx/6HzqEBfN 6Dqy1wa3cv5d7fRSTGGf3ZuCUBRidGbj4R6hkEBuIHcdnNjBHVa/No3ZZuXUYFzFK7os fYKERSzb9L3ytt7999cmjN38Nx+/+XvUgUH696zB9KDIASRwpss+8Dmf00uxQNN/NhFl xaRkt9MrBwmWKmshjllpUGrfwy1lFrLuoLb3AT0tgjn065ixtGQTjZd9fcoPx+E+kZaR V03E9oLJxf76hXIJACLfzSAoQBof4P5VFuA8N+O776+IpkASAKPAA62UQm7cBPTk5Oos go2w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FM4lmVs/oFeytjE3xnkWPccoNwqoiHA+rJHbp+spOO4=; b=Ws/OeilOmJTVwcz+vbY126spVRXlyFj/O8GPKKyDHG8dEaoNdkJ3XL3pRr1RJLPRV7 zDaWnDTgo7fK3flsphqGHC8EywR9d5LBo7wbJAP4ycju5rNOlEElM9Sy+aAMis11RCtV 4gXXoInlXyN2qp/SSogsHvTksVCYLCF0B8h8k+S6WzshR4wNuQUHXt+r39xWXlH3yb3N G0Meh0hPYqnGTQlh1eyypeewaLfqFNtkQ0RGbb7XWth79wUErvPLEokbICxBvNdfd8p/ COVVZnsrOGJ5CF89SetgOVqaalNdYPZYYtF8ZEPGySE8VcqF4OfroMGeB+IkRjWS4kQO jUrA== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6m5XGkBpFkX2ME35mIh6nsrUC3p/4SuBxlZp/1pQnRIr3xlua8 mmsmyUD5r0YXGCDjTtPq2UwziVeAosuVMstsDUs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+SErgx57uiHX4SFbq9rWakDeSrtmyolJV3c+QxLWbOOd9nY/uTaDLA0pbM++Xd2Iuu8JKn7A9KPYUr5u5KLbYU= X-Received: by 10.223.151.197 with SMTP id t5mr539044wrb.263.1510010827577; Mon, 06 Nov 2017 15:27:07 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.199.140 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Nov 2017 15:27:07 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5121452.M8NYrTEKNB@peggleto-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <5121452.M8NYrTEKNB@peggleto-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com> From: Andre McCurdy Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2017 15:27:07 -0800 Message-ID: To: Paul Eggleton Cc: OE Core mailing list Subject: Re: Releases of BitBake to package for Fedora? X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2017 23:27:07 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 8:16:06 AM NZDT Andre McCurdy wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Burton, Ross wrote: >> > The bitbake API isn't really stable and has a reasonable amount of change, >> > so if you were to package it then there's a good chance it would be out of >> > date within six months and people who wanted to use the latest oe-core >> > release against the packaged bitbake would hit API version errors. The >> > recommended usage is to bundle in some way bitbake and the metadata >> > (combo-layer, submodules, repo, whatever). >> > >> > As such there are no tarballs. There are branches for each version and >> > commits where the version is bumped, if you're really determined to >> > package a snapshot. >> >> If there's no realistic hope of (or need for) using bitbake standalone >> then maybe it's time to move bitbake into oe-core? > > Well, there are folks out there using bitbake with their own (non-OE) > metadata, Are any of those projects public? I'd be interested to see how that's being done. > and that is absolutely supported, so even in the absence of stable > releases of BitBake that distros could pick up the separation does still have > a purpose. > > Cheers, > Paul > > -- > > Paul Eggleton > Intel Open Source Technology Centre