Usage of monotone.openmoko.org
john_lee at openmoko.com
Mon Jan 7 07:16:37 CET 2008
On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 11:09:29AM +0000, Thomas Wood wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 14:00 +0800, John Lee wrote:
> > If we want to use OM mtn for development, the policy should be clear
> > that ALL OM related packages cannot commit code that depends on
> > upstream OE instead of OM mtn. There's no way we could maintain a
> > stable daily build if we keep changing the outside dependency.
> > Your comments?
> Sounds fine to me, as long as it is clear to all OpenMoko core
> developers. I would imagine some sort of procedure describing what to do
> when things break would be good as well. For example, do we: revert the
> changes in openmoko-terminal, fix OM mtn at a particular revision of
> openmoko-terminal until the next time OM mtn is synched with OE, or
> update OM mtn straight away?
For now: Revert it since it's the same as "break the build". Make the
necessary modification after the next sync.
In the future: update OM mtn straight away. Every OM developers will
have commit permissions sometime after gta02 ships.
> > This is rather a grey area for me. If dbus >= 1.1.1 is a requirement
> > that you cannot integrate PackageKit without it, I will lean toward
> > commit to OM first, make sure the latest version builds, then merge
> > upstream. Commit to OE really seems reasonable but that will break
> > daily builds and I really hope moko-autorev.inc + OM mtn works.
> I can see that using doing development in OM mtn would cause problems,
> because of possible conflicts when re-syncing with OE. Perhaps for that
> reason it would be best for development to stay upstream in OE? That way
> there is only one source of changes for OM mtn and therefore no issues
> with conflicts.
Please don't break the daily builds.
More information about the distro-devel