Update of poky to morty branch

Zeeshan Ali zeeshan.ali at pelagicore.com
Thu Jan 12 08:28:43 EST 2017


Hi Stephen,

On 12 January 2017 at 13:48, Stephen Lawrence
<stephen.lawrence at renesas.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Zeeshan Ali [mailto:zeeshan.ali at pelagicore.com]
>> Sent: 11 January 2017 13:51
>> To: Stephen Lawrence <stephen.lawrence at renesas.com>
>> Cc: Genivi Project <genivi-projects at lists.genivi.org>
>> Subject: Re: Update of poky to morty branch
>>
>
> [snip]
>
>> >> >> My suggestion would be that GDP 11 is maintained until GDP 12 is out
>> >> >> but not after. No updates of any kind will get in, only fixes.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > I can see that there is a balance to be struck and major new work would
>> >> > likely be targeted for the newer version, but I would argue for a longer
>> >> period.
>> >> > Probably a year.
>> >>
>> >> I'm fine with 1 year support cycle but at the same time supporting 3
>> >> versions at the same time could become a lot of extra work for GDP
>> >> team. If we are going for 1 year support for each release, I recommend
>> >> then we also do 1 release every year.
>> >
>> > I was thinking more of 2 versions. So GDP 11 would accept updates,
>> > whilst GDP 12 was being developed and initially released. Then GDP 11
>> > would close to non-fixes with the move to the GDP 13 cycle.
>>
>> Ah OK so you'd like last two (stable) release branches to be
>> maintained? While this might work, I'd like to be conservative here.
>> So if the decision is up to me, I'd want to only maintain last release
>> (even if that means just reviewing fixes) and master.
>>
>> The reason is that I (and Viktor) am still new to GDP and GDP 11 has
>> already been a learning curve and following your proposal would mean
>> that we'll also need to learn and test GDP9, which we have no idea
>> about to be able to properly evaluate/review any fixes submitted for
>> it. So maybe once GDP 12 is out, we can think about maintaining last
>> two releases, rather than only the last one?
>
> No I'm not suggesting you maintain GDP9. I'm suggesting you start with the
> current release:
>> > I was thinking more of 2 versions. So GDP 11 would accept updates,
>> > whilst GDP 12 was being developed and initially released. Then GDP 11
>> > would close to non-fixes with the move to the GDP 13 cycle.
>
> For the reasons stated previously.
>
> I'll give you a practical example. GDP 11 will be supported on R-Car Gen 3
> early Feb. I'm talking to the NW EG about adding AVB to GDP. That work
> needs to be done, then hopefully people will build cool things on top
> but that may come just as or in the months after you release GDP 12
> at which point you will not accept updates. Rather than telling such groups
> no go create a community for that work over there, I'm suggesting you
> keep the energy in the GDP infrastructure.
>
> As I said before Genivi does not typically pre-announce version updates
> so we can completely plan for Genivi 12 support in our dev plans. We have
> to react once we know what is needed. It is not known yet what Weston
> version will be required for example. So platform support will typically trail any
> announcement. Once it is ready of course we update.

Thanks for the practical example and explanation. As long as you don't
want us to support GDP9, it's all good. :) Given that you have a very
compelling case, it's very likely that we'll support GDP11 after GDP12
is out but let's make that decision then.

-- 
Regards

Zeeshan Ali



More information about the genivi-projects mailing list