From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.5088.1583885120779824743 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:05:21 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=GQomzkBF; spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 205.139.110.120, mailfrom: lersek@redhat.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1583885119; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=5VyYHEJIbFvJpS3mT4sDZ1OhRdJDzuHuCfuCgVVg4aY=; b=GQomzkBFOGgFLxqMWJuURH5DtixJa4yPV9Lf77ZODP8ZqR3I48LqKUeU1/10nI4M7iBJyP /1doCIxMXxQgok3cB+xbrQF/mYe4N+InUqvdagoB/caw28WtoW8RK9qAHFtuxWKk9Sw3DF E77RRoF8YqoMEfCc5On5uRsH1yu3cDU= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-382-MOjMuesqPN2XbdkhU6k4gg-1; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 20:05:11 -0400 X-MC-Unique: MOjMuesqPN2XbdkhU6k4gg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AECF189F760; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:05:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-116-246.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.246]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21F8C91820; Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:05:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Adding Bhyve support into upstream EDK2 To: devel@edk2.groups.io, sean.brogan@microsoft.com, Michael D Kinney References: <13852.1583869480045221662@groups.io> From: "Laszlo Ersek" Message-ID: <277d6b5f-5063-7d44-244b-d2e92c6e4dcf@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 01:05:07 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <13852.1583869480045221662@groups.io> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (This message seems to have broken the threading, so I'll make an attempt below, to quote the context in a way that I think is logical.) On 03/10/20 20:23, Michael D Kinney wrote: > Sean, > > This is the reason that OvmfPkg was kept in the edk2 repo so only a > single repo is required for local dev testing and CI testing. Same > reason for the EmulatorPkg. > > The current rule for the edk2 repo is common firmware packages and > virtual/emulated platforms. > The fact that there has not been bandwidth to implement the CI testing > for OvmfPkg or EmulatorPkg is not a reasonable reason to remove them. > > Mike On 03/10/20 20:44, Sean via Groups.Io wrote: > If I look around i don't see that documented. > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2#code-contributions > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/Code-Contributions > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/How-To-Contribute > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/How-to-Become-a-Contributor > > In Laszlo's massive write up that is very detailed for the > contribution process there is nothing calling out that the contributor > must test on any given platform. > He does however suggest that maybe as a maintainer you should test it > but again no indication of how/what/where. > https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/Laszlo's-unkempt-git-guide-for-edk2-contributors-and-maintainers#maint-13 > > In all the teams i have worked with over the years no one has used > OVMF or emulator package as the verification for an edk2 patch. Maybe > that is just my experience. > > Overall my point is I don't think this is clear to the community and I > believe that adding this requirement without actually building the > full infrastructure online will be detrimental to the contribution > process. And if building the infrastructure online then build it to > scale to N platforms to cover more of the edk2 community and not just > those in the edk2 tree. I remember that "virtual platforms should remain in the tree" (paraphrased) was part of one of Mike's RFCs for the split-out repositories (edk2-platforms or similar). I can't find the exact message now (even though I recall responding to it, with a "thank you"), but I have found subsequent statements: * http://mid.mail-archive.com/E92EE9817A31E24EB0585FDF735412F5B8B385D8@ORSMSX113.amr.corp.intel.com https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/edk2-devel@lists.01.org/message/BG7IWV7SWJCX44T4RFAE36GJNJGBBPRH/ * https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1374#c0 * https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1467#c0 * https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1793#c0 Not claiming that any of these are official documentation, it's just illustration that it has been "operating knowledge / agreement" for many. Thanks Laszlo