[oe] Splitting meta-oe?

[Tom Rini]

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 09:10:25PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 9:07 PM, Otavio Salvador
> <otavio at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Richard Purdie
> > <richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >> I could combo-layer pieces of meta-oe into poky but I'd imagine that
> >> would create more problems than it would solve too and given the
> >> general dislike of combo-layer, I think ultimately better layer tooling
> >> would be a better answer and more acceptable to everyone.
> >
> > Poky creates more problems then it solves
> 
> ... send was too soon ...
> 
> Poky creates more problems then it solves.
> 
>  - it causes confusion
>  - it avoids the urgency in adopting a setup script
>  - it does not use the layers as we market as being a good thing
> 
> So adding more things to it, just makes it worse.
> 
> The setup script is more urgent to be discussed then splitting meta-oe.

I agree that a setup script of some sort (off the top of my head,
something that takes layer-names as input, checks vs a list,
fetches/clones, creates a wrapper around bitbake-layers to always add
them) should be a high priority.  I don't have a problem telling my
customers to clone meta-openembedded and then use the layers that are
needed in that specific project.  But it's painful to have a shell
for-loop in the docs we provide so they can setup a build.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/attachments/20180221/1a5edb78/attachment-0002.sig>