From: Patrick Williams <patrick@stwcx.xyz>
To: Joseph Reynolds <jrey@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: openbmc <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Brad Bishop <bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com>
Subject: Re: Request new repo for IBM-specific code
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 08:29:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YIwGHYc11MZ6Dxz7@heinlein> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2b7c9c78-37c5-5964-5f4c-d07fadf3590a@linux.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1603 bytes --]
On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 04:09:58PM -0500, Joseph Reynolds wrote:
> So ... does the GitHub OpenBMC organization host vendor specific repos
> (perhaps github.com/openbmc/ibm-misc), or does the source code go
> somewhere else (such as IBM's public fork in
> github.com/ibm-openbmc/pam-ibm-acf)?
I'm strongly opposed to dumping-ground repositories like
"<company>-misc". We approved exactly one of those and the rationale we
were given was they had a bunch of existing code they were going to work
at getting upstreamed, but wanted a place to be able to interact with
their vendors in the interrim. We should not be having *new* code going
into that or any other "misc" repository.
We have generally not wanted OpenBMC-oriented code in non-openbmc-org
repositories that are then picked up by openbmc/openbmc recipes. If you
have a generally applicable library that isn't tied to openbmc in any
way, or especially one that already has good usage outside of openbmc,
then another github org seems reasonable. That isn't what you have
here.
It sounds like you have a good definition here of what you want to do,
so I'm fine with `openbmc/pam-ibm-acf`. I don't see any reason we
cannot host `openbmc/<company>-<feature>` repositories for things which
are company specific, as long as those repositories are only picked up
by your meta-<company> layer.
[[
I think is / will be additional work going on in the background to
come to better consensus and document any rules around repository
creation. This is my current opinion.
]]
--
Patrick Williams
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-30 13:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-05 3:14 Request new repo for IBM-specific code Joseph Reynolds
2021-03-05 19:15 ` Patrick Williams
2021-03-05 22:05 ` Patrick Williams
2021-03-07 4:09 ` Joseph Reynolds
2021-03-08 18:45 ` Patrick Williams
2021-03-08 20:30 ` Request new repo for IBM-specific code - pam_2fa discussion Joseph Reynolds
2021-03-08 22:41 ` Patrick Williams
2021-03-09 17:43 ` Joseph Reynolds
2021-04-29 21:09 ` Request new repo for IBM-specific code Joseph Reynolds
2021-04-29 21:24 ` Ed Tanous
2021-04-30 0:47 ` Joseph Reynolds
2021-04-30 13:29 ` Patrick Williams [this message]
2021-05-01 5:30 ` Request new repo for IBM-specific code: ibm-acf Joseph Reynolds
2021-05-02 23:46 ` Andrew Jeffery
2021-05-03 1:37 ` Andrew Jeffery
2021-05-03 16:21 ` Request new repo for IBM-specific code Ed Tanous
2021-03-08 16:03 ` Ed Tanous
2021-03-08 17:30 ` Joseph Reynolds
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=YIwGHYc11MZ6Dxz7@heinlein \
--to=patrick@stwcx.xyz \
--cc=bradleyb@fuzziesquirrel.com \
--cc=jrey@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=openbmc@lists.ozlabs.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).