On 11/28/17 9:45 AM, akuster808 wrote: > > > On 11/27/2017 09:20 AM, Mark Hatle wrote: >> On 11/21/17 3:24 PM, Burton, Ross wrote: >>> On 21 November 2017 at 08:55, Hongxu Jia <hongxu....@windriver.com >>> <mailto:hongxu....@windriver.com>> wrote: >>> >>> If yocto is interested in this layer and will accept it, >>> I could send pull request or some one directly fetch >>> from above github master branch. >>> >>> >>> Are you asking for a git repo on git.yoctoproject.org >>> <http://git.yoctoproject.org>? If you want one I believe the process is to >>> ask >>> Michael Halstead. There's no reason why it can't be maintained in this >>> repository forever though, just submit it to the layer index. >> The request is for more then just a repository. (We can get a repository >> anywhere..) What he is asking for is, is this something that the Yocto >> Project >> itself wants to own. He is still offering to be the maintainer of the layer, >> but the project being owned by the Yocto Project itself has more >> implications. > That is an interesting question. Are you suggesting a discussion with > the YP membership since they are the ones who are providing the > resources for the Project?
At present, we (Hongxu) intend to maintain the code and continue to evolve and do all of the activities you would expect. But I do think the YP membership needs to at least be involved in a discussion of 'should this be a YP layer or not'. With the understanding that branding and [some day] resources may be needed to continue the work. (I want to make sure this isn't just shoveled over a wall and ignored.. that serves no one.) >> >> I.e. using the bugzilla, discussion on the @yoctoproject.org mailing lists, >> etc... what happens if he is no longer able to willing to maintain the >> layer.. etc. >> >> In addition, my understanding is a target based installer has places to >> insert >> logos. Currently these are blank. If the Yocto Project wants to be the home >> for this, then I would also hope that specific logos would be approved for >> use >> within the default installer instance. >> >> If this is outside of the scope of what the Yocto Project itself wants to >> own, >> then OpenEmbedded is the next place that might see value in this.... if not, >> then a github project will be fine. > > > Having an open discussion, like this is more in line with open source > philosophy and I thank you. This is exactly why I wanted it done this way. The discussion needs to be open. This isn't a vendor specific BSP or vendor specific chunk of code.. (At least it's not intended to be.) Thus the broader question being asked. > Kind regards, > Armin >>> Ross > > -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto