Managing openbmc with subtree

[Brad Bishop]

> On Aug 9, 2018, at 8:31 PM, Dave Cobbley <david.j.cobbley at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> So to net these all out:
>>> 
>>> *poky/
>>> 
>>> *meta-openembedded/
>>> *meta-virtualization/
>>> *meta-security/
>>> *meta-arm/
>>> *meta-openpower/
>>> *meta-x86/
>>> *meta-phosphor/
>>> 
>>> *meta-aspeed/
>>> *meta-nuvoton/
>>> *meta-raspberrypi/
>>> 
>>> *meta-intel/
>>> *meta-mellanox/
>>> *meta-portwell/
>>> *meta-quanta/
>>> *meta-ibm/
>>> *meta-ingrasys/
>>> *meta-inventec/
>>> *meta-rackspace/
>>> *meta-qualcomm/
>> Just to clarify - *meta-intel would contain our machine specific configurations for particular intel platforms, while *meta-x86 would contain image-like things that are generic to all x86 server platforms?
>> Not sure I understand why meta-x86 exists if meta-intel/mellanox/portwell/quanta are all on the top level. Meta-x86 was simply a folder in my proposal.
> Looking at this further, I believe I understand the difference:
> meta-intel is our actual baseboard products
> meta-x86 is all things that relate specifically to baseboards that contain x86 processors.
> 
> Does that sound right?

Yes, exactly.

>> -Dave