On Wed, 14 Sept 2022 at 07:49, ChenQi <qi.c...@windriver.com> wrote: > I'm reluctant to agree that this is like machine and distro, because > it's a hard requirement that machine and distro definitions be under > some layer, otherwise how can bitbake get info about it? But > TEMPLATECONF seems to be a different case, it could be everywhere > because it's used by the project setup script. > > In our case, the TEMPLATECONF is <project_dir>/config/, and layers are > <project_dir>/<layer>/. This directory hierarchy has been working for > years until recent changes. > > Do you think such directory hierarchy makes sense? How about we deleting > such check if there's no strong technical reason to do so? By 'strong > technical reason', I mean that some codes in oe-core are written based > on this assumption (this is the part I'm sure about).
Again, it's not about only code. It's about humans too: we benefit from having things where we expect them to be. If your templates are in meta-layer/conf/templates/ you do not have to document, explain or support this; anyone new to the project will simply pick this up from prior experience or official documentation. That said, there is already code that makes this assumption too: both 'bitbake-layers save-template-conf' and upcoming 'oe-setup-build' (the patch was sent for review here) consider only meta-layer/conf/templates. I have to ask the same question to you: is there a strong technical reason that you cannot move the templates to the new standard location? Alex
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#170636): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/170636 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/93368468/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
