Re: [edk2-devel] EDK II Stable Tag release edk2-stable201905 completed

["Laszlo Ersek" <lersek@redhat.com>]

On 06/12/19 11:21, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 10:18:24AM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>> In this instance, we explicitly don't care about the submodule for
>>> that other project (and I really hope this is the norm) - so we
>>> shouldn't be documenting steps that rely on that additional
>>> submodule existing.
>>
>> Yes; this is why I suggested dropping "--recursive" from the
>> instructions. As far as I remember, it was meant as a convenience for
>> users cloning the edk2 repo from zero.
> 
> But we've never actually relied on that behaviour, so it's not so much
> convenience as cargo culting.
> 
>>> This is why I am referring to anything other than a central definition
>>> of the relationship between edk2 and its submodules as a workaround. I
>>> am not suggesting any shortcomings in the technical aspect.
>>
>> Can you provide an example definition then? I'm having trouble imagining
>> one.
> 
> Laszlo, I think you've misunderstood me somewhere.

That's for certain. :)

> What I am saying is:
> - We should have a policy (i.e., a section in toplevel Readme.md)
>   regarding submodules.
>   - That policy *should* include the requirement to not permit
>     submodules requiring submodules for our purposes.
>   - That policy should include the steps required to get the edk2
>     repository to a buildable state.
>   - Nothing related to submodules should be documented anywhere else
>     in the tree. Sure, OpenSSL-HOWTO.txt can still be there, but
>     the section "HOW to Install OpenSSL for UEFI Building" should go.

Got it now. Good idea.

Thanks!
Laszlo