From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.cbnco.com ([207.164.182.72]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nu3Sp-0001il-17 for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:44:09 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.cbnco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F087F67E399 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 08:40:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp.cbnco.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.cbnco.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25125-04 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 08:40:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from juice.ott.cti.com (auriga-dmzgw.cbnco.com [207.164.182.65]) by smtp.cbnco.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 984E367D774 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2010 08:40:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 08:40:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Smith X-X-Sender: michael@juice.ott.cti.com To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at cbnco.com X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 207.164.182.72 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: msmith@cbnco.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on discovery X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:20:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on linuxtogo.org) Subject: Re: BBVERSIONS X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:44:10 -0000 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > Then again I feel it is in most cases better to move forward. E.g. for > your nano example: why would people want to build say nano 1.0.2 if > there is also a working 1.0.6 recipe (or even a 2.2.3 one or whatever > version it is at). I feel it is better to spent time to > fix/improve/add/repair the latest version than spend time fixing old > code. > (generally speaking that is) I have a distro I use quite a bit at work, but don't have a lot of time to maintain - only a few days a month. I'd like to be able to pull the latest .dev from time to time to get kernel updates, xorg, etc. - things that are adding new features, support for new hardware, mostly. Nano is a good example of an application where I'll never, ever want new features. :) As long as the version I've pegged keeps building, I'd rather not have to think about re-testing the new version, or checking how much bigger it got. If the recipe is unsalvageable, fine, kill it and I'll spend the couple of hours it takes to re-test - just please don't delete recipes only for the sake of tidying. Mike