[OE-core] [RFC] policy proposal: INC_PR

[Mark Hatle]

On 9/20/11 2:04 PM, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> Hello, colleagues,
> 
> While debugging some stuff in oe-core & company I've noticed that
> lot's of packages
> either don't use INC_PR, or misuse it (e.g. .inc has INC_PR, but then
> .bb just defines PR = "rX").

I've noticed similar things.  I'd agree, we should define and use INC_PR for
items that have .inc files.  There have been many times that I need to fix a bug
in the .inc file and end up manually updating the PR is 2 or 3 recipes that use
the .inc.

One question though, how do we handle packages with multilib .inc files?

INC_PR += ...  (or is it .=)

--Mark

> From my previous experience with oe-dev, I found INC_PR very usefull
> and error-prone feature.
> What about making usage of INC_PR a policy decision, demanding that
> all new packages should use INC_PR for their recipes, if .inc files
> are used. And then define a grace period
> during which all remaining packages should be converted to INC_PR (3
> months? Next release? I really don't know).
> 
> I'm sorry if this issue was already discussed somewhere and I'm
> duplicating the efforts
> or proposing already discarded idea.
>