[oe] OpenEmbedded and the Yocto Project

[Leon Woestenberg]

Hello,

On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Scott Garman <sgarman at zenlinux.com> wrote:
> On 11/02/2010 07:42 AM, Koen Kooi wrote:
>>
>> Before we go vote on stuff, I propose to try to work on relatively
>> small focussed projects together to see how our goal and way of
>> working match the yoctoproject ones. Things like tinderbox upgrades,
>> buildbot integration and BSP splitting come to mind. The minutes Leon
>> sent today reflect that a well.
>
Agreed. Creating an OpenEmbedded roadmap with such projects, so that
everybody sees what they can contribute to, would help.

We cannot really assign people (like sometimes a company can) but we
can ask them to do what they like, and make them like what they do
(mostly by being nice, oh, and visiting tropical islands once in a
while).

Typically, we have to spread our work more than a company does. I
think we did good over the last few years by attracting new developers
(despite the still steep learning curve). "But does it blend^Wscale?"

To extend a bit on the points still in my head from OEDEM:

- Tinderbox upgrades (automatically parse the collective build
database to extract useful information).
- Buildbot integration
- recipe tree namespace (BSP, ...) splitting in directories and/or overlays.
- automated tests and result reports on qemu targets
- automated tests and test reports on remote hardware board targets
- make available recipes from OpenEmbedded in Yocto(-OpenEmbedded)
- GCC 4.5.x
- merge Yocto/Poky improvements back to OpenEmbedded (checksum-tracked
progress from Richard's Poky proof-of-concept, cross-prelink)

> I am one of the folks who has been working on the Yocto Project (my work
> email is scott.a.garman at intel.com, IRC nick zenlinuxPDX). One of my primary
> responsibilities to date has been setting up and maintaining our
> Buildbot-based autobuilder.
>
Did you keep notes on how to setup such an autobuilder that you can
share in order to easily scale up this effort?

Regards,
-- 
Leon