[OE-core] [PATCH 2/7] gstreamer1.0-plugins-base: upgrade to version 1.6.0

[Khem Raj]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 11:53 PM, Carlos Rafael Giani
<dv at pseudoterminal.org> wrote:
> Am 2015-09-28 um 08:47 schrieb Khem Raj:
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Carlos Rafael Giani
>> <dv at pseudoterminal.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> The other patches in the list above, however, need to be reworked to
>>> apply
>>> against 1.6.
>>> 0001-basetextoverlay-make-memory-copy-when-video-buffer-s.patch has been
>>> rejected by upstream,
>>> handle-audio-video-decoder-error.patch is under discussion.
>>> taglist-not-send-to-down-stream-if-all-the-frame-cor.patch hasn't been
>>> looked at yet by upstream.
>>>
>>> Since these no longer apply cleanly against 1.6.0, we anyway have no
>>> option
>>> but to delete them and wait until the authors reworked them.
>>
>> hmmm, I would have preferred a conclusive situation where we know
>> exactly what they fixed and what we dont have when we drop them
>> somewhere in commit message, ideally they should be forward ported
>> along with recipe upgrades but its ok if you dont feel comfortable and
>> want to defer it to original submitters but then please CC the
>> submitters so they know whats needed of them
>
>
> Yep, I already sent them a mail about the necessary rework a month ago, when
> I was first trying out release candidates for 1.6, but I'll give them a
> status update.
>
> As for the patch that got rejected by upstream (but that I didn't delete,
> because it can still be applied), do I delete this one as well? Is there a
> general preference in such situations? I personally would prefer to stick
> with what upstream does.

yes, however sometimes it might be OE issue that upstream might not
share in such cases you have to carry rejected patches. Ideally the
problem should be explained better to upstream and amicable patch
found to fix it but that may not happen always