| |||||||||||||
The embedded long-term support initiativeThe embedded long-term support initiativePosted Oct 30, 2011 10:00 UTC (Sun) by dirklwn (subscriber, #80581)Parent article: The embedded long-term support initiative
Looking from an ARM point of view, in a small private discussion after Tsugikazu Shibata's talk, there came up some questions:
What's the difference between this LTSI and what Linaro is already doing? Will LTSI have the man power to do what they plan? Where should this man power come from?
From an ARM point of view, it sounds like there is some overlapping between what Linaro is doing and what LTSI plans to do? A lot of ARM developers are working for Linaro, already. Doing parts already now what LTSI plans to do?
Wouldn't it make sense to align LTSI and the Linaro work somehow? Again, at least for the ARM world?
(Log in to post comments)
The embedded long-term support initiative Posted Oct 30, 2011 15:36 UTC (Sun) by tbird20d (subscriber, #1901) [Link]
We (CEWG) are in talks with Linaro to see how we can collaborate on this. Linaro is doing some great work, which we would like to of course leverage. Hopefully, we'll be able to pick up some things from CE vendors that they wouldn't otherwise get, and get those into their tree. I'm hopeful there will be lots of code exchange between the two projects. But we'll have to see how quickly they move on to another kernel version.
Linaro has a pretty aggressive upstream-first policy (which is good, but it keeps them constantly moving forward). The version gap between what companies are actively using in their product and mainline is precisely what LTSI is targetted at bridging. I can imagine LTSI pulling features that Linaro has pushed to mainline.
|
|||||||||||||