Hi Mike/Sean,
First of all Sean, thanks for your submission and thanks Mike for
looking at this.
Unfortunately I only have time to glance at this, but here are my
comments:
- The python script is okay as it's private to the platform. If
it could be used in a wider context (for other platforms) then
maybe it could be moved. For now its fine.
- The .ltibrc should not remove 'LTIB-added-package-pool' (I
can't recall, but someone wanted that added)
- The configure line in strace.spec should not be commented out.
Aside from that the only other thing to stress is that anything
checked in should be original (add your own Copyright notice if
appropriate) and compatible with GPLv2. If it's not original,
please make sure you keep all the headers/citings and that the
licenses is GPLv2 compatible. In a similar vein, anything uploaded
to the GPP must be freely distributable under an appropriate Open
Source license, and you need to fill in the details of the
origin/license when you upload.
Cheers, Stuart
On 24/09/12 19:52, Mike Goins wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Sean Malloy
<address@hidden> wrote:
I'm ready to call the diff & packages that I have up at
https://drive.google.com/#folders/0B5oPSqrs5WbUNndYZ0pxTm10NkE
"Release Candidate 1"
Assuming there are no objections, what's the first step towards
getting the changes committed?
Stuart? Any objections to me posting a new platform? I've built
using the patches above.
I do have a reservation about the mkimage python script. ltib is
primarily perl and there currently isn't a requirement for host side
python. Cn it be implemented in perl to avoid the requirement, or
just consider it a boutique requirement for that one platform?
Thanks
-Sean
--
Sean C. Malloy
address@hidden
|