[ resending with the correct address ]
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:03:32 -0400, James Westby james.westby@canonical.com wrote:
On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 16:26:46 -0400, James Westby james.westby@linaro.org wrote:
There is also one larger question, which is that I disagree that we shouldn't provide anything that will go in a hardware pack in the linaro images. I think that having the images be useful by themselves has lots of benefits.
- Being able to quickly spin up an image in QEMU makes for easier testing.
- Requiring a hardware pack for every operation will make some things more tedious.
- If everything in a hardware pack becomes more consolidated then hardware packs probably become less useful.
- Not having a flag day where suddenly our images aren't installable and hwpack-install has to work well, and before that date we can't test hwpack-install on the images we produce.Having not had anyone convince me that stripping our images is the right thing to do I have carried on attempting to write the spec without requiring this. There will be a few issues, such as ensuring that the kernel we want is the one that boots, but we have that problem on hwpack upgrades anyway, so it doesn't go away by stripping the images.
I have
https://wiki.linaro.org/Platform/UserPlatforms/Specs/10.11/HardwarePacks
to a state where I am happy to start implementation now. Feedback on the spec is still welcome, and things will still be subject to change. In particular there are still a number of TODOs in the spec where I don't know how to proceed, but I believe that none of those block us starting implementation of other parts.
Is the current status quo to create specs under the "linaro" project on Launchpad? I'll create a spec for this so that we can track work items for it.
Thanks,
James