On Wednesday, 10 May 2017 8:39:58 AM NZST Alexander Kanavin wrote: > On 05/09/2017 11:19 PM, Khem Raj wrote: > > I think we should always intend to align the reference stack with > > whats commonly used in > > userbases we target to address with project, we will not be serving > > the project goals and its username if we > > trim down to packages which are just used for reference, if majority of > > the community we intend to address uses QT or any other stack for that > > matter then we should align our requirements accordingly which will be > > mutually beneficial IMO > > I strongly disagree. Oe-core is not a Greatest Embedded Hits collection > or any kind of 'reference stack', and decisions on what goes into it > should not be based on how popular it is.
A number of things have been added to OE-Core because they are widely used, so I don't think that's true. However, that doesn't mean that would be used as a justification to add Qt5. I'm not even convinced we would need to add Qt5 to OE-Core in order to use it as part of a reference UI - the key requirement would be for us to commit to being part of its testing and maintenance, everything else is just logistics. > If you do this, you risk overextending the layer, and ending up not doing a > particularly good job on any of the things it tries to do. It's best to > allow other layers to flourish, let the domain specialists do their job and > decide for themselves how they want to do things, and have a curated list of > layers that are known to be high quality and approved by Yocto Project. > > If you want qt5, use meta-qt5 and meta-b2qt, both made by people who > actually develop the Qt stack itself. End of story. Your opinion is noted. My opinion is that we ought to be providing a good reference that can be used as a basis for real products (regardless of whether whatever direction we choose to go is Qt-based or not) - the rest of our stack *is* used that way, after all. We regularly get comments about how Sato isn't suitable as such a basis, so the expectation is there. I don't think adding Wayland support alone will answer that. Cheers, Paul -- Paul Eggleton Intel Open Source Technology Centre -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
