[OE-core] meta-gplv2? [Was Re: parted_1.8.6.bb: add parted that not GPLv3]

[Otavio Salvador]

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:36 PM, Burton, Ross <ross.burton at intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 11 August 2015 at 16:46, Khem Raj <raj.khem at 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