[OE-core] oe-core cleanup...

[Tom Rini]

On 03/02/2011 12:18 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 19:27 +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
>> Op 2 mrt 2011, om 19:00 heeft Richard Purdie het volgende geschreven:
>>
>>> Thanks for starting this thread Mark, I've also just been looking at
>>> this question so its timely.
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 11:30 -0600, Mark Hatle wrote:
>>>> I finally got a chance to look at the oe-core and where it currently is..  Some
>>>> suggestions below:
>>>>
>>>> LICENSE file, this may need to be cleaned up to only cover the components
>>>> actually in the oe-core.
>>>>
>>>> README likely needs some revision
>>>>
>>>> README.hardware needs a lot of revision.  Anything outside of support for QEMU
>>>> should be removed.
>>>>
>>>> The meta-demoapps and meta-rt components, will those be staying or going?
>>>>
>>>> The meta/recipes.txt needs to be verified as still what we want -- I assume it
>>>> is at this point..
>>>>
>>>> meta/recipes-...  sato, qt, gnome, I thought were going elsewhere?
>>>>
>>>> Do the items in the "scripts" need to be renamed or is Poky being kept in the
>>>> naming?  Same with the poky-init-build-env?
>>>>
>>>> Then I also assume the items in the documentation directory need to be cleaned
>>>> up as well...
>>>>
>>>> Let me know what you'd like me to try and tackle -- or if we need to bring these
>>>> items up at the TSC for recommendation.
>>>
>>> I'm proposing this change so far:
>>>
>>> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/poky-contrib/commit/?h=rpurdie/roorg&id=891ad22536b49d4fee066a5865ad730f791d36e9
>>>
>>> with those relocated files being removed from oe-core. Any objections to
>>> that to start with?
>>
>> Why not put the recipes in meta-oe? I have need for e.g eds-dbus and would like to have that in meta-oe.
>
> Which pieces are we talking about? Does oe-core want sato? Should some
> of these go to meta-gnome and is that what we want? Or do we want all of
> sato there?
>
> I was under the impression sato might not be wanted but I'm open to
> influence either way on that. Certainly there are some pieces "we" as in
> Yocto put into recipe-sato that could arguably be positioned elsewhere.
>
> Are you also concerned about meta-demoapps or is that fine?

To me, sato should be however poky wants to deal with it.  But a lot of 
the deps are common gnome things and so forth that others care about too 
and we should try for meta-oe.  Again, to me, this is how we can 
reconcile the bits that poky has better than oe.dev (and vice versa) so 
both parties win.

-- 
Tom Rini
Mentor Graphics Corporation