Compliancy Discussion: Difference between revisions

From Yocto Project
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Created page with "What would it mean to be "Yocto Project Powered"? [Some initial ideas to seed the discussion] You would need to: * Support in the aims and objectives of YP (decrease fragmenta...")
 
m (Made link more visible)
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
What would it mean to be "Yocto Project Powered"?
== Working Draft of Compliance Proposal ==
The current working draft can be found '''[[ Working Draft of Compliance Proposal|here ]]'''


[Some initial ideas to seed the discussion]
== Yocto Project Aligned ==


You would need to:
To use this term in connection with any product or project or in marketing materials you need to:


* Support in the aims and objectives of YP (decrease fragmentation of embedded ecosystem and focus around a common shared set of tools, formats and best practices).  
* Be working towards and supporting the aims and objectives of the Yocto Project. These include decreasing the fragmentation of embedded ecosystem and focus around a common shared set of tools, formats and best practices. We want to avoid multiple groups of people repeating the same work and have one set of great tools rather than multiple tools with drawbacks.
* Promotes the OpenEmbedded Architecture and layer model
* Be promoting the OpenEmbedded Architecture, layer model and BSP format
* Use core Yocto Project Technology directly (Bitbake, OpenEmbedded-Core, Pseudo, Eglibc)
* Be making visible contributions in the OpenEmbedded and component projects of the Yocto Project  
* Be working and contributing directly in the communities for the core YP technologies
* Aim for compatibility and interoperability between different metadata layers.
* Derive from the YP release process and branches/releases
* Be an open source project, charity organisation, small business or consultancy or member of the project. Larger companies (80+ employees) may also meet this criteria but are strongly recommended to be members of the project.
* Use BSP format for hardware support
 
* Model orthogonal layer concepts and the separation of hardware (BSPs), Software (recipes) and Policy (distro config)
== Yocto Project Powered ==
* Promote LTSI kernel versions (future)
 
* Be a member of the Linux Foundation and the Yocto Project
To use this term in connection with any product or project or in marketing materials you need to:
 
* Be able to satisfy all the criteria for "Yocto Project Aligned"
* Be an open source project, charity organisation or a member of the Yocto Project
* Be able to answer 'Yes' to all the criteria in the compliancy checklist.
 
== Yocto Project Powered Compliancy Checklist ==
 
* If the project includes build system functionality, are BitBake and OpenEmbedded-Core included as components? (Y/N)
* If present, can the directories containing BitBake and OpenEmbedded-Core be clearly identified within the system and only contain those components?
* Have all patches applied to BitBake and OpenEmbedded-Core (if present) been discussed with the open source community? (Y/N)
* Do all layers contain a README file which details the origin of the layer, its maintainer, where to submit changes for it and what dependencies or version requirements it has? (Y/N)
* Do all layers present build cleanly against OpenEmbedded-Core with only the dependencies/requirements listed in their documentation? (Y/N)
* Does any hardware support follow the format defined in the Yocto Project Board Support Package (BSP) Developers Guide? (Y/N)
* Are hardware support, configuration (distro) policy and recipe meatdata clearly separated into different layers which do not depend on each other? (Y/N)
* Is clear documentation of which combinations of layers, recipes and machines were tested included? (Y/N)
* Where any item in the "Yocto Project Powered Compliancy Recommendations" list is not true, is this documented in the testing documentation? (Y/N)
 
== Yocto Project Powered Compliancy Recommendations ==
 
* Linux kernels are either based around LTSI kernel versions or are more recent that the last LTSI release
* Everything should build successfully with the standard toolchain from OE-Core where the architecture is one supported by OE-Core as standard?

Latest revision as of 17:18, 17 May 2012

Working Draft of Compliance Proposal

The current working draft can be found here

Yocto Project Aligned

To use this term in connection with any product or project or in marketing materials you need to:

  • Be working towards and supporting the aims and objectives of the Yocto Project. These include decreasing the fragmentation of embedded ecosystem and focus around a common shared set of tools, formats and best practices. We want to avoid multiple groups of people repeating the same work and have one set of great tools rather than multiple tools with drawbacks.
  • Be promoting the OpenEmbedded Architecture, layer model and BSP format
  • Be making visible contributions in the OpenEmbedded and component projects of the Yocto Project
  • Aim for compatibility and interoperability between different metadata layers.
  • Be an open source project, charity organisation, small business or consultancy or member of the project. Larger companies (80+ employees) may also meet this criteria but are strongly recommended to be members of the project.

Yocto Project Powered

To use this term in connection with any product or project or in marketing materials you need to:

  • Be able to satisfy all the criteria for "Yocto Project Aligned"
  • Be an open source project, charity organisation or a member of the Yocto Project
  • Be able to answer 'Yes' to all the criteria in the compliancy checklist.

Yocto Project Powered Compliancy Checklist

  • If the project includes build system functionality, are BitBake and OpenEmbedded-Core included as components? (Y/N)
  • If present, can the directories containing BitBake and OpenEmbedded-Core be clearly identified within the system and only contain those components?
  • Have all patches applied to BitBake and OpenEmbedded-Core (if present) been discussed with the open source community? (Y/N)
  • Do all layers contain a README file which details the origin of the layer, its maintainer, where to submit changes for it and what dependencies or version requirements it has? (Y/N)
  • Do all layers present build cleanly against OpenEmbedded-Core with only the dependencies/requirements listed in their documentation? (Y/N)
  • Does any hardware support follow the format defined in the Yocto Project Board Support Package (BSP) Developers Guide? (Y/N)
  • Are hardware support, configuration (distro) policy and recipe meatdata clearly separated into different layers which do not depend on each other? (Y/N)
  • Is clear documentation of which combinations of layers, recipes and machines were tested included? (Y/N)
  • Where any item in the "Yocto Project Powered Compliancy Recommendations" list is not true, is this documented in the testing documentation? (Y/N)

Yocto Project Powered Compliancy Recommendations

  • Linux kernels are either based around LTSI kernel versions or are more recent that the last LTSI release
  • Everything should build successfully with the standard toolchain from OE-Core where the architecture is one supported by OE-Core as standard?
Retrieved from "https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/index.php?title=Compliancy_Discussion&oldid=5972"