Barros Pena, Belen | 28 Mar 19:00 2013
Picon

RFC: templates in Hob 1.5

Hob in the 1.4 release will no longer have Templates. We removed them
because the functionality was poorly defined and seemed to cause some
confusion (https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2935)

When we tried to define it properly, we realised that templates could be a
few different things, and that we should find out which of them is the
most useful. This email is my attempt to gather your thoughts on this
templates business.

I guess the key question to answer is: in your opinion, which parts of the
configuration should be saved as part of a Hob template?

If we can get some consensus, we might be able to bring Templates back in
the 1.5 release.

Thanks!

Belen

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Corporation (UK) Limited
Registered No. 1134945 (England)
Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ
VAT No: 860 2173 47

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

(Continue reading)

Trevor Woerner | 28 Mar 22:34 2013
Picon

Re: RFC: templates in Hob 1.5

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Barros Pena, Belen
<belen.barros.pena@...> wrote:
> When we tried to define it properly, we realised that templates could be a
> few different things, and that we should find out which of them is the
> most useful. This email is my attempt to gather your thoughts on this
> templates business.
>
> I guess the key question to answer is: in your opinion, which parts of the
> configuration should be saved as part of a Hob template?

If someone handed me something and said "this is my embedded Linux
distribution's template" I would assume it would pertain to the "feel"
of this distribution and not, for example, to the list of packages,
machine, endianness, interfaces, or anything else processor-,
installation-, or board-specific.

Yocto creates distributions. So if Yocto/Hob has something called
"templates" then a sensible question to ask is "what is in a Debian
template?" or a Fedora template? or an openSUSE template? And how do
they compare to each other?

Each of these distributions (Debian, Fedora, openSUSE) can create
images for x86, x86_64, ARM, and other targets, therefore the choice
of hardware doesn't define a distribution's template. The person
installing Fedora on one machine can choose which packages to install
such that two people's installations could look entirely different
from each other (e.g. one person might choose XFCE and the other use
Gnome), therefore the list of packages doesn't define a distribution's
template. Each of these can be installed on devices that have or don't
have Ethernet ports, serial ports, various video output, and various
(Continue reading)

Barros Pena, Belen | 2 Apr 12:21 2013
Picon

Re: RFC: templates in Hob 1.5

Thanks, Trevor! Looking at what others are doing regarding templates
sounds like a good starting point, of course. But it seems to me there is
more interesting stuff buried somewhere in your answer, so I hope it's ok
if I dig a little deeper.

I think I might have asked the wrong question. Let's forget about the word
"template" for a moment, and ask something a bit different: of the stuff
you select / configure when building an image with Hob, what would be
useful to save for reuse? Once we determine that, we can discuss how it
should be called ("template" could be the wrong word).

Thanks!

Belen

On 28/03/2013 21:34, "Trevor Woerner" <twoerner@...> wrote:

>On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Barros Pena, Belen
><belen.barros.pena@...> wrote:
>> When we tried to define it properly, we realised that templates could
>>be a
>> few different things, and that we should find out which of them is the
>> most useful. This email is my attempt to gather your thoughts on this
>> templates business.
>>
>> I guess the key question to answer is: in your opinion, which parts of
>>the
>> configuration should be saved as part of a Hob template?
>
>If someone handed me something and said "this is my embedded Linux
(Continue reading)

Trevor Woerner | 2 Apr 17:50 2013
Picon

Re: RFC: templates in Hob 1.5

On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Barros Pena, Belen
<belen.barros.pena@...> wrote:
> But it seems to me there is
> more interesting stuff buried somewhere in your answer, so I hope it's ok
> if I dig a little deeper.

:-D

> I think I might have asked the wrong question. Let's forget about the word
> "template" for a moment, and ask something a bit different: of the stuff
> you select / configure when building an image with Hob, what would be
> useful to save for reuse? Once we determine that, we can discuss how it
> should be called ("template" could be the wrong word).

When I use Hob to click on things here and there, I'm usually just
playing around; just trying out some things. When I find some
combination of things that I like, my instinct would be to
compartmentalize that off into a layer: a particular grouping of
packages would either be a DISTRO or an image, building something for
a particular development board would be a BSP or a MACHINE (etc).

In other words I think the "layer" concept completely captures
whatever it is you're trying to capture with "templates".

:-D

If you're looking to integrate this functionality into Hob, maybe you
need to look at some way of creating layers? Perhaps a user could save
their package configuration as a DISTRO or in an image layer?
(Continue reading)

Barros Pena, Belen | 2 Apr 19:03 2013
Picon

Re: RFC: templates in Hob 1.5

On 02/04/2013 16:50, "Trevor Woerner" <twoerner@...> wrote:

>On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Barros Pena, Belen
><belen.barros.pena@...> wrote:
>> But it seems to me there is
>> more interesting stuff buried somewhere in your answer, so I hope it's
>>ok
>> if I dig a little deeper.
>
>:-D
>
>> I think I might have asked the wrong question. Let's forget about the
>>word
>> "template" for a moment, and ask something a bit different: of the stuff
>> you select / configure when building an image with Hob, what would be
>> useful to save for reuse? Once we determine that, we can discuss how it
>> should be called ("template" could be the wrong word).
>
>When I use Hob to click on things here and there, I'm usually just
>playing around; just trying out some things. When I find some
>combination of things that I like, my instinct would be to
>compartmentalize that off into a layer: a particular grouping of
>packages would either be a DISTRO or an image, building something for
>a particular development board would be a BSP or a MACHINE (etc).
>
>In other words I think the "layer" concept completely captures
>whatever it is you're trying to capture with "templates".
>
>:-D
>
(Continue reading)

Barros Pena, Belen | 20 May 18:03 2013
Picon

Re: RFC: templates in Hob 1.5

We have been redesigning the Hob feature that we used to call 'templates'
for implementation during 1.5

If you'd like to have a look at what we are thinking, you can check the
bugzilla feature

https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4193

and the document attached to it:

https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/attachment.cgi?id=1218

Work in progress still, so feedback welcome.

Belen

On 02/04/2013 18:03, "Barros Pena, Belen" <belen.barros.pena@...>
wrote:

>On 02/04/2013 16:50, "Trevor Woerner" <twoerner@...> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Barros Pena, Belen
>><belen.barros.pena@...> wrote:
>>> But it seems to me there is
>>> more interesting stuff buried somewhere in your answer, so I hope it's
>>>ok
>>> if I dig a little deeper.
>>
>>:-D
>>
(Continue reading)


Gmane