[meta-ti] question on meta-ti for yocto

[Koen Kooi]

Op 22 mrt. 2012, om 17:48 heeft William Mills het volgende geschreven:
> ---------------------------------
> [speaking for myself now]
> 
> I fully support base poky testing but I think we are getting dangerously close to a defacto statement that the only real yocto based distro is one that _only_ uses poky + a BSP layer.  I am not aligned with that view.  I think oe-core and poky are a fine base but many customers will need to expand on what is there with more layers.

I have sent multiple emails to the oe-core/poky/yocto lists and bothered people in person about this, but the result is no answer at all (emails) or "Yes, we need to address the confusion" in person, but no action at all. I've found that the most successful way to get a clarifying statement is to be a giant troll and send flames like I did this week and in the past.

Specific example of getting no answer: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/yocto/2012-March/007309.html

> Richard,
> 
> You seem to take offense at Koen's claim that Angstrom is Yocto.  As I stated above I don't think Angstrom _is_ yocto but how do we refer to distributions that are based off of oe-core or even poky that include other layers.  Are they "Yocto based" or "Yocto aligned"?  How about "Yocto adjacent" :) ?

Yoctogenerian? And related to the email linked to above, what's the route to move a yoctogenerian distro under the yocto banner?

> Koen,
> 
> The next time someone asks how to build "yocto" can you let Denys answer please :)

Sure, will do.

regards,

Koen