From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B487C433E0 for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 17:04:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8D8364E5F for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 17:04:35 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D8D8364E5F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=stwcx.xyz Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DjZYZ3J3yz3cGk for ; Sun, 21 Feb 2021 04:04:34 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=stwcx.xyz header.i=@stwcx.xyz header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm1 header.b=WRk7FPOC; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=hYDeCmUf; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=stwcx.xyz (client-ip=66.111.4.27; helo=out3-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=patrick@stwcx.xyz; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=stwcx.xyz header.i=@stwcx.xyz header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm1 header.b=WRk7FPOC; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=hYDeCmUf; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DjZY749wSz30NC for ; Sun, 21 Feb 2021 04:04:11 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CDBD5C00AF; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 12:04:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 20 Feb 2021 12:04:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stwcx.xyz; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm1; bh=Mhx80HVl+EHe0kgDvp4F8x0/+Wz fg+qv8jSlJ1RFGak=; b=WRk7FPOCAitJDuHoVEWRYpVm3d/z1/fntwEzHlJgPVU wRMs2wu57oh03fTjidocQddWU6cTK8y1Pz4mCXHXR593CqHX+U13+h/Mhc9rpENN xRG5vroue3O1DcJaXxy31loBgDAm7TPWnO9po1vKA+i/4oUOBXwXl4MilK4KfuKa mLgpYAqhm+E0loAFJxppmVo9tb3Vg/Wj1XxvGUAg4vXosB6pNPGu+vS4zRx1cRFl gi6YPnL0MBdA4JBID1c3S5SoFDTBasnEfdRDlSuh5kxx7yjedg0/yiVIyGKJfgeV cnWy+tjj1vqDZQgHBsjbzZMT4vVhmPmhjuEkLcTBwOg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Mhx80H Vl+EHe0kgDvp4F8x0/+Wzfg+qv8jSlJ1RFGak=; b=hYDeCmUfelp659ZVHjvk6C /FEQojGb+xtH0neogYXYenMK21VLBscyKruSDvM/SX4hem23RXJp84UWvUagphle dGSwjLoHIRDM7vKjBxxpcQO+vgdE81g0mz3NqyoJ9F5zJzEmnumHoi2Yoarj9ytv SXy1LO2j6tyh/qGo+c+m5TRqwl5wzMPkfbLFfLbcSj4nigfyw4NqhpWHF9RzOe+g xL0KPMUjAlNpySCa1D8bv+DWHw0sb+OML9mXHbpR9v+6GTAFdrFclaUPV1+xt8HZ 2uAGvnUrdzRO6DLLAeeYPxBqBgvutSLJbdbXfKMfu2XDuZWUoGItaC/dxB1HPoaA == X-ME-Sender:

X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrjeekgdeludcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenfg hrlhcuvffnffculdefhedmnecujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddv necuhfhrohhmpefrrghtrhhitghkucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehprghtrhhitghksehsth iftgigrdighiiiqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeegheehfeffgeekveehtdfhgfduhfeg fefgtdehhfektdelffevkefgueffhedtieenucfkphepjeeirddvhedtrdekgedrvdefie enucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehprght rhhitghksehsthiftgigrdighiii X-ME-Proxy:

Received: from localhost (76-250-84-236.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net [76.250.84.236]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 82ED324005A; Sat, 20 Feb 2021 12:04:07 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2021 11:04:06 -0600 From: Patrick Williams To: Joel Stanley Subject: Re: Any convention on putting source codes into openbmc/openbmc repository Message-ID: References: <71820e5a-1231-1937-1344-dee9f4a03600@os.amperecomputing.com> <42403202-49c9-2b85-1207-4c84ec491332@os.amperecomputing.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="M1l+PL+5sHIoxQhI" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: OpenBMC Maillist , Thang Nguyen Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" --M1l+PL+5sHIoxQhI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 05:23:56AM +0000, Joel Stanley wrote: > On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 at 01:31, Thang Nguyen = wrote: > > > > > > On 18/02/2021 06:46, Nancy Yuen wrote: > > > > Code should be put into an appropriate repo, and repos created where ne= cessary. Then referenced in recipes from openbmc/openbmc metalayers. > > >=20 > It's a requirement. My opinion is that there are two reasons that come to my mind on why we follow this convention right now beyond just that Yocto is happier with it: 1. We like to have a discussion before making a new repository to make sure we're not fragmenting the codebase more than necessary. Often problems/solutions overlap more than might seem obvious when you're looking at it just from your machine or architecture's perspective. There may be some existing implementation that could be modified slightly to make it fit your needs, or it could be that someone else has the same problem and would like to work with you on implementation. 2. All of our CI infrastructure is set up where machine recipes go in openbmc/openbmc and code goes in various code repositories. If you try to put code directly into openbmc/openbmc you do not gain any of those CI efforts we already have: * Build of your code and unit tests when someone makes a code change. * Unit test execution. * Code formatting. * Static code analysis. We have a lot of support at a repository level that doesn't exist in openbmc/openbmc directly, because it isn't approriate for what is there. Hopefully this gives you some additional context on why. --=20 Patrick Williams --M1l+PL+5sHIoxQhI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEBGD9ii4LE9cNbqJBqwNHzC0AwRkFAmAxQQYACgkQqwNHzC0A wRm0RQ/+PRmmrgj/F1+YyEpVm4a3DO+qIBe/C1l2EsLcpNnOe/NZrh9m9LbM00h1 XlSZZriPl6LAOhWHl3bwvclS1mMajHM4YRtAb3q80Qldt111NwC5I5Z/xVMymv93 IXbVINSFaFrNiqk/diGmOwUlyKHm0HOEsR7c0278b7Gomz/kyWsit9YqxTvK+SqV aOeZaGHGii9Qq7qEICw6EhQ6F6oFWCjuKeyt19rCpSSPYXwZuomIM7pDvffO10u8 6KueUIfAM4X3vDJvSZjV/C0ryqwkBwvlfwSqbGII/scQGgHycgDzYafnBsZSS27+ d8rViRCDUB7wwMBx5dfgRwhezXHBAvBUPHOxtk1OliqvUc5v7zq/As2nkKrjTiYb C5IfwTdnZKDI4jmVWFZFZI5im3T8D2CrJ0k7+frNlZyU20o6v45fR8MtwvP34z4f nmNSKCgR36RYORDCN8N/I/GbXIRGUJj9gxgxyyGhHhdneBoitIGA4VhjcwX34F8z YcMATc/1sQd+X239GXPFPnbTrCf1fHWe02UrICv+vzdhwco/HUqGr5gN2936SGu2 dj178F6ma5e4utipZ0seCG6W9xlkzt+uWnWiwzEcLm0BOPTNONG5g5wPdQweJx1A MCngjnMDNLIGrwaKXM9igvIevz7tyjnS9PTK7V3iCqhC8XUKkyI= =W8OO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --M1l+PL+5sHIoxQhI--