On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
On 31 January 2012 11:19, Nicolas Pitre nicolas.pitre@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012, Zach Pfeffer wrote:
They love our builds, but they'd really like it if they could get stock AOSP builds for their boards on stable kernels that they can work with using fastboot that have been CI tested and QA'd.
I'm not advocating for the wholesale destruction of our current way of life, tip kernels, tip toolchains, linaro-android-media-create, but I would like to move in a direction that gives our users what they want.
And by the time you do that i.e. stable kernel and so on, then those customers will come back asking for this and that new cool feature available in the latest upstream kernel and ask you to backport it to your stable kernel.
Nico, you bring up a good point. Consolidating and upstreaming core ARM features that exist across each architecture is our main job.
The customer ask remains the same though. If we deliver a platform with a set of features, customers don't want any of those features to break when we give them an upgrade.
You just can't have it both ways. If you focus on a stable platform then you cannot have the latest features. If you develop new features, it obviously can't be stable. But whatever you do, customers will always ask for both in a single package.
I think it is a matter of clearly defining what we do, and also what we don't (and shouldn't) do. Expectations about Linaro cannot be the same as for Ubuntu/Canonical or Android/Google.
Nicolas