From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.dream-property.net ([82.149.226.172]) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1RqUJ3-0005Ra-DP for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:44:21 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B4A531581C1; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:36:33 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.dream-property.net Received: from mail.dream-property.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.dream-property.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id oK4RD8WdYoVL; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:36:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from [172.22.22.61] (drms-590ed503.pool.mediaWays.net [89.14.213.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.dream-property.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 40A3C315818C; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:36:22 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4F219D25.3050604@opendreambox.org> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 19:36:21 +0100 From: Andreas Oberritter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111229 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <1592899.mTy93uB97i@helios> <4F20130D.2010208@balister.org> <1908796.glHMrEiIxU@helios> <4F202735.8040405@balister.org> <20120126090245.GB3747@jama.jama.net> <20120126161123.GD3747@jama.jama.net> In-Reply-To: <20120126161123.GD3747@jama.jama.net> Cc: Martin Jansa Subject: Re: Splitting meta-oe X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:44:21 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 26.01.2012 17:11, Martin Jansa wrote: > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 03:45:52PM +0100, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: >> - and if a recipe is not well enough tested it should probably not end up >> in meta-oe anyway (but better e.g. in meta-oe-next or meta-oe-new or >> whatever you want to call the super bleeding edge version) > > How will Joe Average know that because of webkit-efl he should enable > meta-efl-next (or > oe-core-next-libsoup-development-version-alpha-centauri-edition layer) > if he doesn't even know what's happening in layers he is > using already (meta-efl for webkit-efl)? I think libsoup is not a good example, because the specific version doesn't live in meta-oe, but in meta-efl, which is fine IMO. Being someone who's just in the process of moving a distribution from OE-classic to OE-core + meta-oe, I've already been busy figuring out the exact differences between recipes present in both layers. I'd welcome any reduction in duplication and versions present in both layers. Regards, Andreas