On 02/28/2018 09:17 AM, Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On 02/20/2018 12:45 PM, Burton, Ross wrote: >> Is now a good time to talk about splitting up meta-oe? Some layers are >> actively developed and maintained (one example: meta-python), others are >> basically bitrotting and only get touched when something else causes >> them >> to break world builds (one example: meta-gnome). I've long felt that >> meta-oe should be split up and the high quality layers managed in >> their own >> repositories so patches to them don't get held up by breakage in other >> sub-layers. >> >> Another advantage of splitting out the high quality layers is that we'd >> like to look at running more community layers through the Yocto >> autobuilder, and granular layers make that easier to manage. >> >> Comments? > > I just read the whole discussion (been on holiday), and while it seems > that splitting layers is seen as too heavy-handed, there is still > something that I believe should be done: a policy for blacklisting and > removing unmaintained recipes. Such a policy should be: > > a) clearly defined; > b) consistently applied.
Thank for the input. Its more of a mater of someone willing to sit down and documenting it. Having that said, people tend not to follow process or even read them. I thought Martin sent out an email regarding this Blacklisting process. > > If that is in place, I, as an oe-core maintainer, would be a lot more > willing to contribute to meta-oe, knowing that recipes I contribute to > (for example by fixing issues caused by changes in oe-core) are, in > fact, used and taken care of otherwise. However, me endlessly fixing > well obsolete gnome2 stuff is just a fast track to not caring anymore. We had/have a situation with the Yocto 4.12 kernel that broke wireguard in meta-networking. Their are two patches that don't exist in K.O. which are causing the problem. Meta-openembedded can't fix that, do I blacklist wireguard? Wireguard builds fine with K.O 4.12. We are at the mercy of oe-core; kernel, toolchain and other core changes. Most of the failures now are do to the 4.15 kernel update. > > So, which recipes are unmaintained? > > 1. Badly out of date compared to upstream development. Say, one year > or more between version provided by meta-oe master, and latest version > released by upstream. > 2. Recipes which fail to build, and the situation hasn't been > addressed, in, say, six months. > > Once either of these is established, the recipe enters a grace period > before it is removed. Any objection to such removal should come with a > patch that addresses the reason for it. Thanks for your input. regards, Armin > > > Alex -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel