From: Thang Nguyen <thang@os.amperecomputing.com>
To: Patrick Williams <patrick@stwcx.xyz>, Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>
Cc: OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: Any convention on putting source codes into openbmc/openbmc repository
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 15:25:31 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a53b3558-5502-9e87-7ec2-13b578e1fedd@os.amperecomputing.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YDFBBgX2kRHMlGQK@heinlein>
On 21/02/2021 00:04, Patrick Williams wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 05:23:56AM +0000, Joel Stanley wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 at 01:31, Thang Nguyen <thang@os.amperecomputing.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 18/02/2021 06:46, Nancy Yuen wrote:
>>>
>>> Code should be put into an appropriate repo, and repos created where necessary. Then referenced in recipes from openbmc/openbmc metalayers.
>>>
>> 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.
Thanks. It clears for me.
>
> 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.
Does the CI setup automatically? if not, how can I set it up?
It seems I don't have CI setup on the
http://github.com/openbmc/ssifbridge repository. How can I have CI for it?
>
> Hopefully this gives you some additional context on why.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-22 8:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-17 8:54 Any convention on putting source codes into openbmc/openbmc repository Thang Nguyen
2021-02-17 23:46 ` Nancy Yuen
2021-02-18 1:31 ` Thang Nguyen
2021-02-18 5:23 ` Joel Stanley
2021-02-18 7:42 ` Thang Nguyen
2021-02-20 17:04 ` Patrick Williams
2021-02-22 8:25 ` Thang Nguyen [this message]
2021-02-22 14:26 ` Andrew Geissler
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=a53b3558-5502-9e87-7ec2-13b578e1fedd@os.amperecomputing.com \
--to=thang@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=joel@jms.id.au \
--cc=openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=patrick@stwcx.xyz \
/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).