On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Burton, Ross <ross.bur...@intel.com> wrote: > > On 11 August 2015 at 16:46, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> can we freeze this thread please. > > > Or more usefully, reboot it. Philip, you're turning into Koen! Alex, if > someone on this list asks what Poky is, 99% of the time they're trolling. > :) > > The original and unanswered question was "should oe-core continue to > maintain GPLv2 recipes where upstream has moved to GPLv3 or should those > recipes move to a standalone layer" with various implied questions: > > - If the v2 recipes move to a separate layer, who own/maintains/tests it? > - Should there be v2 recipes for every recipe that has moved to v3, or only > (as is now) the "more-core" recipes (currently YP tests that core-image-base > builds without GPLv3, nothing else more complicated) > - Should meta-gplv2 only contain recipes from oe-core, or all layers? If > other layers decide to hold both v3 and v2 recipes (not that I'm aware any > have), what makes oe-core special? > > I'm torn, Richard is torn. Neither of those are useful to forming a > decision. Does anyone else have any *useful* feedback?
I think it is a matter of resource usage. Up to now, the GPLv2 maintenance has not been so hard and thus I would say for us to stay as is for now. We should revisit this for every release and review if it is time for split it or not. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
