[OE-core] GUI based images

[Philip Balister]

On 05/09/2017 03:03 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> 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.

Does anyone currently ship a real product based on sato?

Yes, I am aware that sato works for testing gui stuff, just trying to
understand if it is used beyond that.

Philip

> 
> Cheers,
> Paul
>