[OE-core] [PATCH 13/13] weston: Upgrade 1.9.0 -> 1.10.0

[Otavio Salvador]

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Khem Raj <raj.khem at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On May 16, 2016, at 3:43 AM, Otavio Salvador <otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 5:18 AM, Jussi Kukkonen
>> <jussi.kukkonen at intel.com> wrote:
>>> On 13 May 2016 at 23:15, Otavio Salvador
>>> <otavio.salvador at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 4:20 AM, Jussi Kukkonen
>>>> <jussi.kukkonen at intel.com> wrote:
>>>>> Support for multiple new protocols, many new features:
>>>>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/wayland-devel/2016-February/027039.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Weston now depends on wayland-protocols (which is protocol
>>>>> collection split off from weston).
>>>>>
>>>>> Remove upstreamed patches, add a patch to fix the wayland-protocols
>>>>> path used during build.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jussi Kukkonen <jussi.kukkonen at intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> I am working on rework the weston recipes and it seems Weston 1.11 is
>>>> close of release. I think instead of adding 1.10 we could use 1.10.91
>>>> and upgrade it to 1.11.0 when it is out (end of May). This avoids
>>>> another cycle of rebase of patches during 2.2 development cycle.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> I don't have a burning need to get 1.10 in at all (I almost didn't
>>> send these in the first place because of 1.11 being just two weeks
>>> away). If you'd rather avoid the churn I'm fine with doing other
>>> things and looking at this again after 1.11 release. I'm also totally
>>> happy to keep my paws off this completely if your rework is going to
>>> include the 1.9 -> 1.11 upgrade in it.
>>>
>>> Here's my current 1.10 branch in case it's useful (the important
>>> change is the WAYLAND_PROTOCOLS_SYSROOT_DIR hack to get multilib
>>> working with allarch wayland-protocols):
>>>  git://git.yoctoproject.org/poky-contrib jku/wayland-1.10
>>>  http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/log/?h=jku/wayland-1.10
>>>
>>> Just to be clear: Based on this discussion I don't currently plan to
>>> send a V2 to list unless there's demand for it.
>>
>> As I said, I would work on 1.10.91 as it is close of 1.11 and easy the
>> upgrade. But all my patches are based on 1.10 now so it is fine with
>> me as well so please send the v2.
>
> If 1.11 is around the corner then why not work on 1.11 ( pre-release ) itself

This was my proposal; to get the 1.10.91 merged.

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750